NATIONAL  IDEALS 
IN  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 


NATIONAL  IDEALS 
IN  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 


BY 


HENRY  J.   CADBURY 


NEW  YORK 
CHARLES  SCRIBNER'S  SONS 

1920 


COPYRIGHT,  1920,  BY 
CHARLES  SCRIBNER'S  SONS 

Published  April,  1920 


The  Bible  text  used  in  this  volume  vexcept  where  otherwise  marked)  is  taken  from  the  Amer- 
ican Standard  Edition  of  the  Revised  Bible,  copyright,  1901,  by  Thomas  Nelson  &  Sons,  and 
is  used  by  permission. 


PREFACE 

DIFFERENT  theories  have  held  the  field  with 
regard  to  the  controlling  factor  in  the  destiny  of 
nations.  In  the  older  study  of  history,  especially  of 
the  sacred  history  contained  in  the  Bible,  God  was 
regarded  as  the  supernatural  cause  of  every 
national  disaster  or  development.  Secular  his- 
tory has  long  been  studied  as  the  history  of  gov- 
ernments, with  emphasis  upon  the  military  rela- 
tions between  states.  Battles  were  the  decisive 
events  and  "big  battalions"  were  the  accompani- 
ments or  the  expressions  of  Providence.  More 
recently  the  economic  interpretation  of  history 
has  come  to  the  foreground,  and  the  fate  of  na- 
tions has  been  said  to  depend  on  natural  resources, 
commerce,  and  the  appetitive  and  competitive 
motives  which  material  needs  stimulate. 

Against  these  extreme  views,  whether  super- 
human or  purely  material,  the  influence  of  na- 
tional ideals  deserves  emphasis.  There  is  a  col- 
lective human  idealism  of  which  neither  economic 
determinism  nor  supernatural  Providence  is  wholly 
independent.  The  folk  songs,  the  war  cries,  the 
moral  standards,  and  all  the  influences  of  civiliza- 
tion and  religion  have  often  determined  a  nation's 
history  quite  apart  from  the  working  of  military 


vi  PREFACE 

and  economic  factors.  Ideals  as  well  as  expecta- 
tion of  profit  have  guided  the  course  of  events 
and  animated  national  conduct.  Providence  has 
found  expression  through  patriot  and  prophet, 
and  through  the  developing  experience  of  nations, 
no  less  than  by  miracle  and  military  intervention. 
History  must  be  interpreted  spiritually  as  well  as 
materially,  naturally  as  well  as  supernaturally. 

The  correct  interpretation  of  history  is  more 
than  an  academic  question.  It  affects  directly 
the  conduct  of  individuals  and  society.  The 
forces  which  seem  to  men  effective  in  the  past 
are  the  very  forces  on  which  they  will  pin  their 
faith  for  the  future.  If  we  accept  the  apocalyp- 
tic interpretation  of  history  as  the  inexorable 
working  of  a  Divine  plan,  we  shall  merely  await 
in  passive  reliance  the  unaided  intervention  of 
God  to  create  the  consummation  of  his  will.  All 
human  endeavor  will  seem  useless  to  hasten  or 
to  hinder  his  purpose.  If  on  the  other  hand  we 
accept  the  economic,  the  military,  or  the  political 
interpretation  of  the  past,  we  shall  use  our  effort 
to  secure  economic,  military,  or  political  readjust- 
ment in  the  future.  These  are  indeed  the  varied 
hopes  of  many  men  to-day — premillenarianism, 
socialism,  militarism,  democracy  are  some  of 
the  names  for  them.  But  if  we  believe  spiritual 
forces  and  ideals  are  the  real  determinants  of 
human  life  and  progress,  then  our  interest  and 
our  effort  will  be  directed  toward  the  creation  of 


PREFACE  vii 

a  new  public  conscience,  of  a  spirit  of  brother- 
hood, and  of  all  the  higher  qualities  of  personal 
and  social  life.  We  shall  interpret  the  movements 
of  our  time  not  as  the  unwinding  of  a  divine 
machine  nor  as  the  conflict  of  states  and  systems, 
but  as  a  conflict  of  ideals.  "We  know  that  the 
whole  creation  groaneth  and  travaileth  in  pain 
together  until  now,"  and  we  shall  appreciate  with 
Paul  "that  the  earnest  expectation  of  the  crea- 
tion waiteth  for  the  revealing  of  the  sons  of 
God."  "The  revealing  of  the  sons  of  God"— this 
simple  realization  of  Christian  ideals  in  all  the 
relations  of  men  and  nations  is  the 

"One  far-off  divine  event, 
To  which  the  whole  creation  moves." 

The  purpose  of  the  chapters  that  follow  is  to 
sketch  in  outline  some  of  the  striking  and  influ- 
ential ideals  which  were  held  by  the  Hebrew 
nation  or  its  leaders  through  the  thousand  years 
of  its  history  covered  by  the  canonical  Scriptures 
of  the  Old  Testament.  This  study  has  been  the 
natural  outgrowth  of  an  impulse  given  by  the 
Great  War  for  the  comparison  of  national  stand- 
ards and  aspirations.  But  it  may  be  predicted 
that  a  few  years  will  not  make  obsolete  the  analy- 
sis of  these  questions  nor  make  valueless  the 
study  of  the  idealism  in  great  nations  of  the  past. 
An  ancient  and  remote  nation  like  Israel  provides 


viii  PREFACE 

a  field  where  such  study  can  be  carried  on  with- 
out passion  or  prejudice. 

It  is  a  strange  fact  that  so  little  investigation 
has  been  made  of  the  subject.  Even  the  study 
of  political  theory  usually  omits  the  ancient  Orient 
altogether  and  begins  in  Greece  only  with  Plato 
and  Aristotle.  Although  the  Bible  has  been  stud- 
ied from  nearly  every  conceivable  view-point,  one 
cannot  easily  name  any  treatise  that  attempts  to 
describe  the  development  of  its  national  ideals. 
This  volume  is  not  an  effort  to  supply  that  lack 
so  much  as  to  call  attention  to  it.  A  thorough 
and  less  popular  study  of  the  subject  by  a  com- 
petent Old  Testament  scholar  would  be  a  useful 
contribution  to  modern  political  thought  as  well 
as  to  a  knowledge  of  the  Bible.  As  will  be  evi- 
dent to  the  reader,  the  author  has  essayed  no 
independent  historical  or  critical  investigations. 
He  is  indebted  to  the  current  English  and  Ameri- 
can commentaries  and  general  works  about  the 
Old  Testament  such  as  are  mentioned  in  the  foot- 
notes. In  the  quotations  from  these  books  the 
spelling  Jehovah  has  been  substituted  for  Yahweh 
and  other  forms  of  the  Divine  name  in  order  to  be 
consistent  with  the  usage  of  the  Bible  text  adopted. 

As  a  background  for  the  study  the  author  has 
adopted  that  reconstruction  of  the  history  of 
Israel  which  appears  to  be  most  generally  accepted 
by  historical  criticism,  although  he  is  fully  aware 
of  the  objections  to  which  this  reconstruction  is 


PREFACE  ix 

open  from  more  than  one  direction.  Perhaps  two 
other  criticisms  will  occur  to  the  reader:  the  failure 
to  emphasize  in  conventional  fashion  the  devel- 
opment of  Hebrew  religion,  and  the  omission  of 
the  New  Testament.  Both  are  due  to  the  lim- 
ited purpose  of  the  book,  in  aiming  to  focus  atten- 
tion upon  a  single  phase  of  a  significant  national 
history.  The  religious  meaning  of  the  Bible  has 
so  long  overshadowed  in  our  minds  its  social  and 
political  significance  that  it  may  be  well  here  for 
the  sake  of  clearness  to  leave  theology  in  the 
background.  It  cannot  be  completely  separated 
even  from  patriotism  and  politics.  The  implica- 
tions of  early  Christianity  for  national  ideals  are 
also  an  essential  supplement  to  the  study  of  those 
ideals  in  Hebrew  history. 

To  the  editors  of  The  Homiletic  Review  and  of 
The  World  Tomorrow  the  writer  expresses  thanks 
for  permission  to  reprint  from  their  columns 
Chapter  XX  and  Chapters  XI,  XII,  XVII,  and 
XXII,  respectively. 

HAVERFORD,  PENNSYLVANIA, 
April,  1919. 


CONTENTS 

PAGE 

I.    INTRODUCTORY:  THE  BIBLE  AND  NA- 
TIONAL IDEALS       1 

II.    THE  POLITICAL  INHERITANCE  OF  THE 

HEBREWS     ........  8 

III.  THE  BIRTH  OF  THE  NATION     ...  17 

IV.  CONTACT  WITH  CULTURE     ....  24 

V.    THE  PERSISTENCE  OF  NATIONAL  CON- 
TRASTS      35 

VI.    E  PLURIBUS  UNUM 45 

VII.    NATIONAL  PROTOTYPES  (GENESIS)       .  51 

VIII.    WAR 61 

IX.    MONARCHY  AND  THEOCRACY     ...  74 

X.    RADICALS  AND  REFORMERS       ...  88 

XI.    RUTHLESSNESS  ABROAD  AND  AT  HOME 

(AMOS) 101 

XII.    LOYALTY,  A  NATIONAL  MOTIVE  (HOSEA)  111 

XIII.  THE  PROPHET  AND  POLITICS  (ISAIAH)  119 

XIV.  THE     LIMITATIONS     OF     STATECRAFT' 

(ISAIAH) 128 


xii  CONTENTS 

PAGE 

XV.    THE  PLATFORM  OF  REFORMATION  (DEU- 
TERONOMY)    137 

XVI.    PROPHETIC  IDEALS  IN  ACTION  (KINGS)  150 

XVII.    AN  UNPOPULAR  PATRIOT  (JEREMIAH)  .  162 

XVIII.    NATIONAL  IDEALS  IN  DISASTER     .     .  173 

XIX.    IDEALS  OF  RECONSTRUCTION  (DEUTERO- 

ISAIAH) *  184 

XX.  ON  INTERNATIONAL  SERVICE  (SERVANT 

SONGS) 196 

XXI.    THE  INTENSIFICATION  OF  NATIONAL- 
ISM      206 

XXII.    A  CARTOON  OF  NATIONALISM  (JONAH)  217 

XXIII.    THE    LITERATURE    OF    SUPPRESSION 

(DANIEL) 224 

XXIV.'    THE  MESSIANIC  HOPE 239 

XXV.    NATIONALISM  TRANSCENDED     .     .     .  251 

CONCLUSION 262 

INDEX  .  265 


NATIONAL  IDEALS 
IN  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 


NATIONAL  IDEALS  IN  THE  OLD 
TESTAMENT 


INTRODUCTORY:  THE  BIBLE  AND  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

IN  every  age  the  Bible  has  not  only  met  the 
personal  religious  needs  of  men,  but  it  has  also 
proved  rich  in  suggestion  for  the  wider  problems  of 
a  changing  world.  This  is  specially  true  to-day, 
when  a  great  war  has  widened  our  horizon  beyond 
our  own  nation  as  never  before,  and  has  encour- 
aged us  to  examine  and  compare  the  ideals  of 
states  and  to  prepare  for  new  international  rela- 
tionships. Trained  to  familiarity  with  the  Bible 
and  reverence  for  it,  we  instinctively  turn  to  it  for 
lessons  and  advice  on  the  problem  of  the  new  world 
that  is  being  born  under  our  very  eyes.  As  many 
generations  have  done  before  us,  we  search  the 
Scriptures  in  the  light  of  new  experiences,  and 
our  search  is  richly  rewarded.  Such  study  of 
the  Bible  is  scarcely  new.  Men  have  always 
turned  to  Scripture  in  national  as  well  as  personal 
crises.  They  have  appealed  to  its  guidance  for 
statecraft  and  leadership.  But  such  use  has  been 
sporadic  and  isolated,  too  often  a  reliance  on 
texts  for  argument,  rather  than  a  scientific  quest. 

1 


There  are  many  reasons  which  justify  such  a 
national  interpretation  of  the  Bible.  In  the  first 
place,  it  accords  with  the  Bible's  historical  origin. 
We  are  wont  to  speak  of  the  Jews  as  the  people  of 
a  book,  but  it  is  no  less  true  that  the  Bible  is  the 
book  of  a  people.  The  Old  Testament  is  the 
collected  remains  of  a  great  national  literature. 
It  breathes  throughout  the  national  spirit.  It 
portrays  a  single  national  culture.  It  traces  the 
continuous  development  in  political  as  well  as 
religious  and  social  institutions  of  the  Jewish 
people,  a  people  as  distinct  by  race  and  by  national 
self-consciousness  as  any  that  was  ever  called  a 
nation.  About  half  of  the  Old  Testament  is  the 
history  of  this  people.  But  even  the  parts  which 
are  not  narrative  deal  far  more  directly  with 
national  questions  than  is  often  supposed.  The 
prophets — in  many  ways  the  greatest  contribu- 
tion of  Israel  to  civilization — were  neither  recluses 
nor  merely  spiritual  reformers;  they  were  men  of 
affairs,  statesmen,  and  political  idealists.  Like 
Moses,  they  were  God's  spokesmen  to  the  na- 
tion. Their  sermons  were  addressed  to  the  peo- 
ple as  a  whole  or  to  its  representatives  rather 
than  to  individual  persons.  As  we  have  come 
recently  to.  recognize,  the  prophets  were  social 
reformers,  not  evangelists,  and  the  society  to 
which  they  devoted  themselves  was  their  own 
nation.  To  a  striking  extent  the  prophets  tran- 
scended even  this  limit  and  reached  a  kind  of 


INTRODUCTORY  3 

"international  mind."  Both  Israel  and  Israel's 
God  were  given  by  them  a  universal  significance, 
and  history  was  interpreted  internationally.  The 
political  interests  of  the  Hebrews  did  not  end 
with  the  fall  of  Jerusalem.  They  still  had  a 
national  life  and  a  national  hope  which  became 
more  exalted  and  more  vivid  the  less  it  seemed 
capable  of  realization.  They  not  only  hoped  for 
Israel,  but  repented  and  prayed  and  planned 
and  fought  for  their  nation.  So  the  later  proph- 
ets and  the  postexilic  writings  of  the  Hebrews 
reflect  their  national  thought  and  aspirations. 
Even  the  Book  of  Psalms,  dedicated  by  centuries 
of  Christian  use  as  the  prayer-book  of  personal 
piety,  was,  without  doubt,  the  liturgy  of  the 
national  sanctuary  of  Jerusalem,  and  some  of  its 
most  individual  expressions  are  to  be  understood, 
by  a  common  Semitic  idiom,  as  the  personifica- 
tion of  collective  prayer  or  thanksgiving. 

Little  less  real,  though  less  obvious  than  in 
the  Old  Testament,  is  the  national  standpoint  in 
the  New.  Its  basis  is  the  fulfilment  of  the  Jew- 
ish national  hope  for  the  Messiah,  and  the  writers 
of  the  new  Israel  not  only  inherit,  but  consciously 
adopt,  much  of  the  national  terminology  of  Juda- 
ism. The  relation  of  the  individual  to  the  state 
emerges  more  clearly  in  the  New  Testament  as  a 
problem  of  conscience.  The  persecutions  of  Je- 
sus and  of  early  Christian  martyrs  present  the 
tragic  conflict  between  loyalty  to  Caesar  and  to 


4  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

God.  In  the  life  and  letters  of  Paul  are  revealed 
some  of  the  difficult  problems  of  internationaliza- 
tion, while  the  canon  closes  with  a  vigorous  broad- 
side against  the  world  empire  of  Rome. 

The  political  elements  contained  in  the  Bible 
are  not  only  extensive,  they  are  varied.  Cover- 
ing over  one  thousand  years  of  history,  the  vicis- 
situdes of  this  small  though  long-lived  people 
provide  a  great  variety  of  situations.  During  all 
this  period  the  political  ideals  of  the  Hebrews  are 
slowly  and  unevenly  evolving  from  the  simple 
Semitic  nomadism  of  the  desert  to  the  cultured 
cosmopolitanism  of  Luke.  In  many  cases  certain 
ideas  can  be  traced  as  they  gradually  develop 
from  one  age  to  the  next;  in  other  cases  we  see 
rival  standards  existing  side  by  side  or  in  open 
conflict — the  new  versus  the  old,  the  material 
versus  the  spiritual,  the  nationalistic  versus  the 
universal.  We  can  trace  the  influence  of  reli- 
gious, social,  and  economic  factors  upon  political 
life  and  tendency.  We  can  inquire  into  the  indi- 
vidual qualities  of  the  outstanding  leaders  in  po- 
litical theory  and  practice.  We  can  test  their 
loyalty  to  the  past,  and  their  adaptability  to  the 
present,  and  their  insight  as  makers  of  their  na- 
tion's future.  But,  above  all,  we  can  learn  from 
the  wide  scope  of  time  represented  how  con- 
stantly "new  occasions  teach  new  duties,"  and 
how  true  patriotism  expresses  itself  in  strange 
and  often  unrecognized  ways. 


INTRODUCTORY  5 

For  the  Bible  has  this  further  advantage  as 
the  teacher  of  civic  duties  and  the  touchstone  of 
national  ideals,  that  its  principal  characters,  in 
spite  of  diversity  of  aim  and  method,  were 
throughout  men  of  unquestioned  patriotism. 
The  long  roll-call  of  heroes  in  Ecclesiasticus 
or  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  is  a  hall  of 
fame  that  would  make  any  nation  proud.  They 
were  men  of  initiative,  resource,  patience,  and 
courage.  From  Moses  to  Paul  they  were  willing 
to  be  "anathema"  for  the  sake  of  their  country- 
men, and  they  labored  through  suffering  and 
often  through  misunderstanding  for  the  better 
country  that  they  saw  with  the  eye  of  faith. 
Thus  the  prophets,  though  notoriously  without 
honor  in  their  own  country  and  generation,  were 
recognized  by  later  generations  and  in  many 
lands  as  the  supreme  type  of  patriot.  The  high- 
est loyalties  can  always  find  both  example  and 
expression  in  the  pages  of  Scripture. 

But  the  greatest  quality  of  the  political  idealism 
of  the  Bible  is  its  high  spiritual  and  moral  tone. 
Religion  penetrates  even  the  most  secular  phases 
of  Hebrew  life  and  gives  a  spiritual  outlook  to 
every  important  utterance  of  the  Hebrew  nation. 
With  this  people  the  combination  of  church  and 
state,  as  we  call  them,  was  ever  peculiarly  close. 
The  two  were  co-extensive  in  scope  and  coinci- 
dent in  power.  Even  in  its  most  primitive  stages 
Hebrew  political  life  was  religious.  The  founding 


6  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

both  of  the  state  and  of  its  worship  is  to  be 
traced  to  the  same  event — the  Exodus  from 
Egypt;  and  to  the  same  human  leader — Moses. 
Thereafter  warriors  and  kings  share  their  honors 
with  priests  and  prophets.  In  the  Bible,  there- 
fore, as  nowhere  else,  statecraft  is  free  from 
purely  material  and  expediential  bias.  National 
ambitions  are  formed  and  tested  by  current 
standards  of  religion.  National  welfare  is  always 
the  welfare  of  the  nation's  God.  History  is  in- 
terpreted spiritually,  and  the  development  of 
the  state  is  the  medium  for  divine  revelation. 

Finally,  by  studying  the  Bible's  lessons  for  mod- 
ern national  life,  we  are  copying  closely  the  exam- 
ple and  purpose  of  its  writers.  Few  of  its  records 
are  contemporary  with  the  events  they  describe, 
and  few  are  written  just  for  their  own  story. 
The  narratives  of  the  Bible  are  intended  to  teach 
lessons  from  the  past  for  the  present.  This  prag- 
matic element  is  characteristic  of  both  the  Old 
Testament  and  the  New,  and  explains  both  the 
selection  and  the  presentation  of  the  narrative 
material.  If  one  writer  describes  the  life  of 
Israel  under  Moses  as  a  theocracy  it  is  because 
he  considers  that  kind  of  commonwealth  the  ideal 
for  his  own  later  days.  If  the  sermons  of  Isaiah 
were  recorded  long  after  his  death  it  was  because 
they  were  felt  to  contain  sound  advice  for  the 
tangled  but  similar  political  conditions  of  the 
century  that  followed  him.  So  the  stories  of 


INTRODUCTORY  7 

Elijah,  of  Jonah,  and  of  Daniel  are  obvious  efforts 
to  train  the  national  conscience  of  later  genera- 
tions. Surely  such  precedents  justify  us  in  ap- 
plying to  our  own  times  the  Bible's  national 
ideals  in  so  far  as  the  historical  situations  are 
comparable  and  the  moral  principles  involved 
are  eternally  righteous  and  universal. 


II 

THE    POLITICAL    INHERITANCE    OF    THE    HEBREWS 

THE  founding  of  the  Hebrew  nation  may  be 
dated  from  the  Exodus  from  Egypt,  but  the  roots 
of  the  nation,  of  its  physical  and  social  history, 
of  its  economic  and  political  institutions  and 
ideals,  lie  far  back  of  Moses  and  his  generation 
in  the  desert  life  of  Arabia.  For  the  Hebrew 
stock  was  Semitic,  and  at  some  time  it  had  been 
in  the  most  primitive  stage  of  culture — the  cul- 
ture of  the  nomad.  Indeed,  the  Hebrews  were 
but  little  removed  from  that  stage  when  first 
they  emerged  from  Egyptian  slavery  and  pushed 
their  way  into  Canaan,  as  some  of  their  ancestors 
had  pushed  into  the  fertile  lands  of  Egypt.  Such 
migrations  from  the  desert  of  Arabia  into  the 
richer  lands  about  it  have  characterized  the 
whole  history  of  the  barren  peninsula,  with  its 
limited  resources  for  the  support  of  human  life. 
Palestine  itself  seemed  to  the  desert  folk  a  land 
flowing  with  milk  and  honey,  and  was  the  lure  of 
successive  waves  of  nomad  immigration  long  be- 
fore and  long  after  the  famous  venture  of  the 
Hebrew  spies. 

To  these  nomad  ancestors,  therefore,  must  we 
look  to  gain  some  idea  of  the  Hebrew  heritage 

8 


POLITICAL  INHERITANCE  9 

of  political  thought  and  customs.  No  records  of 
these  men  have  come  down  to  us  on  paper  or 
stone.  They  lived  and  died,  as  transient  as  the 
life  of  all  their  kind, 

"Like  snow  upon  the  desert's  dusty  face." 

Nor  did  their  descendants  soon  enough  commit 
to  writing  their  memories  of  the  past  to  preserve 
an  accurate  picture  of  the  desert  life.  The  He- 
brew records,  even  in  Genesis,  all  presuppose  some 
stage  of  agricultural  development.  The  first 
man,  both  in  Eden  and  without  it,  was  a  tiller  of 
the  soil.  It  is  true  that  many  of  the  nomad 
habits  and  customs  still  survived  in  the  age  of 
Hebrew  history  that  is  known  to  us  from  con- 
temporary records,  and  confirm  our  assump- 
tion of  a  nomadic  origin  and  of  powerful  no- 
madic heredity.  These  clues,  together  with  the 
similar  survivals  found  in  other  developed  peoples 
of^Semitic  origin,  form  one  source  of  knowledge 
about  the  Hebrew  ancestors.  But  a  far  more  com- 
plete and  no  less  reliable  picture  is  to  be  found  in 
the  modern  life  of  the  Arab  bedouin.  Scarcely 
scratched  with  the  civilizations  that  have  risen 
and  fallen  about  them  for  thousands  of  years, 
these  children  of  the  desert  have  kept  unchanged 
most  of  the  characteristics  of  the  remotest  past. 
By  studying  these  sources  a  clear  impression 
can  be  formed  of  the  life  of  the  primitive  Semites 
that  was  bequeathed  to  those  hardy  sons  of  the 


10  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

desert  who  were  welded  into  a  Hebrew  nation. 
Their  life  was  simple  and  natural.  It  had  no 
artificial  boundaries;  but  religion,  social  custom, 
and  government  were  all  bound  into  one,  and 
these  were  largely  determined  by  the  economic 
conditions  under  which  they  lived.  If,  however, 
adopting  the  modern  method  of  classification,  we 
select  those  elements  in  nomad  life  that  can  be 
called  political,  we  shall  find  the  following  out- 
standing factors: 

The  unit  of  nomad  life  is  neither  the  individual 
nor  the  nation  but  the  tribe  or  clan.1  The  family, 
of  course,  exists,  but  the  ties  of  kinship  extend  to 
more  than  the  immediate  family  circle  and  include 
the  larger  circle  of  kindred  by  blood  and  marriage. 
The  tribe  is  economically  and  religiously  the  unit, 
owning  property  in  common — such  property  in 
cattle  as  the  nomads  possess — and  worshipping 
the  same  totem  or  god.  The  tribe  lives  together 
at  an  oasis  and  travels  together  from  place  to 
place  in  the  desert.  But  its  unity  is  fortified  not 
so  much  by  the  common  ties  of  blood — which  are 
often  remote  and  even  imaginary — nor  by  the 
bonds  of  mutual  service,  nor  by  the  fellowship  of 
common  worship,  but  primarily  by  the  need*  of 
mutual  defense.  Each  tribe  is  hostile  to  its 

1  Clan  and  tribe  are  often  used  interchangeably  by  writers 
on  this  subject,  nor  is  any  effort  made  here  to  describe  the 
more  elaborate  organization — which  is  possibly  quite  primi- 
tive— by  which  a  group  of  clans  are  loosely  federated  to 
form  a  tribe. 


POLITICAL  INHERITANCE  11 

neighbor,  and  it  is  this  fear  that  creates  the  tribal 
loyalty  and  finds  its  most  characteristic  expres- 
sion in  the  law  of  blood-revenge. 

The  vendetta,  or  law  of  blood-revenge,  belongs 
to  many  primitive  cultures  and  survives  even  to 
the  present  day,  not  only  in  backward  regions  but 
(in  modified  form)  even  in  the  penal  and  military 
institutions  of  the  "civilized"  world.  As  ex- 
pressed in  Genesis  9:5,  6,  it  is  an  ordinance  of 
God  that  "whoso  sheddeth  man's  blood,  by  man 
shall  his  blood  be  shed."  In  the  life  of  the  bed- 
ouin this  means  that  the  tribe  is  bound  to  avenge 
the  death  of  one  of  its  members,  by  the  death  not 
necessarily  of  the  murderer  nor  of  merely  one 
member  of  his  tribe,  but  by  manifold  vengeance 
on  himself  and  his  kin.  And  this  duty  is  estab- 
lished by  all  the  sanctions  of  religion.  In  strik- 
ing contrast  to  the  Ishmaelite  hostility  between 
clans  is  the  well-known  bedouin  law  of  hospital- 
ity. Parallel  with  the  anarchy  of  the  desert, 
where  all  tribes  are  rivals  and  each  must  fight 
for  its  existence,  is  the  unalterable  and  sacred 
custom  which  welcomes  the  stranger  without 
question  and  without  selfish  restraint. 

Within  the  political  unit  a  simple  patriarchal 
form  of  government  prevails  in  all  matters  directly 
affecting  the  interests  of  the  whole.  The  sheik  is 
leader  in  peace  and  war,  in  religion,  and  in  quest 
for  food  for  his  clan.  But  the  sheik  is  raised  but 
slightly  in  dignity  and  power  over  the  other  free 


12  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

members  of  the  clan,  who  stand  to  each  other  in 
the  relation  of  brothers.  The  members  accept  his 
rule,  and  little  individual  initiative  can  arise 
where  mutual  dependence  is  the  unconscious 
background,  where  custom  is  unquestioned  law, 
and  where  personal  ambition  cannot  disturb  the 
simple  equality  within  the  tribe. 

To  any  one  familiar  with  the  Old  Testament 
the  influence  of  these  nomad  standards  and  prac- 
tices upon  the  Hebrew  people  is  apparent.  There 
is  much  of  the  nomadic  not  merely  in  the  stories 
of  Genesis,  as  we  should  expect,  but  also  in  the 
later  narratives  of  the  Judges  and  the  Kings.  As 
has  been  said:  "In  spite  of  the  tradition  of  the 
national  unity  under  Moses  before  Palestine  was 
reached — the  children  of  Israel  are  represented 
during  the  process  of  that  invasion  and  after  its 
achievement  as  still  a  number  of  loosely  connected 
tribes.  One  of  the  strongest  of  these,  Judah,  was 
reinforced  by,  if  indeed,  it  did  not  entirely  con- 
sist of,  clans  which  for  centuries  resided  on  the 
desert  border.  Another  tribe,  Simeon,  never  left 
the  desert.  The  whole  nation  was  reminded  that 
it  inherited  a  civilization  which  it  did  not  cre- 
ate (Deut.  6:10,  11).  Customs  and  institutions, 
tempers  and  attitudes  toward  civilization,  reli- 
gious conceptions  and  religious  rites,  long  per- 
sisted in  Israel,  some  of  which  were  identical  with 
those  of  the  desert  nomads  and  some  were  strongly 
reminiscent  of  them.  'To  your  tents,  O  Israel/ 


POLITICAL  INHERITANCE  13 

was  still  the  national  cry  in  the  days  of  the  king- 
dom. Long  after  the  monarchy  had  created  a 
central  executive  government  among  the  people, 
with  guards  or  police  and  prisons,  the  private 
vendetta,  mitigated  by  a  modified  form  of  the 
right  of  asylum,  was  retained  in  the  national 
law."1 

And  so  the  influence  of  the  political  heritage  of 
the  desert  long  continued  with  the  settlers  and 
residents  of  Canaan.  There  was  much  of  the 
restless  independence,  the  practical  democracy, 
the  love  of  generous  liberty,  which  the  desert 
had  bred.  There  was  still  the  divisive  tendency 
which  made  the  achievement  of  a  larger  national- 
ism so  difficult.  As  in  the  larger  units  of  the 
modern  time,  making  society  safe  required  not 
so  much  the  increase  of  democracy  within  the 
units  as  a  more  extensive  integration  and  organ- 
ization between  the  units.  Nowhere  has  this 
been  more  evident  than  in  Arabia,  the  cradle  of 
all  Semitic  races.  As  Professor  Smith  says :  "  The 
population  is  broken  up  into  tribes,  that  are  de- 
fined not  by  the  more  or  less  vague  areas  over 
which  they  roam  in  search  of  pasture,  but  by 
ties  of  blood  and  kinship,  supplemented  by  fic- 
tions of  a  common  descent  or  other  artificial  expe- 
dients. Famine  and  war  are  the  annual  curses 
of  their  life.  The  insufficiency  of  water  and  pas- 
ture; the  strain  of  hunger  and  the  jealousy  of 

1  George  Adam  Smith,  The  Early  Poetry  of  Israel,  p.  41. 


14  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

blood,  all  the  heat  and  recklessness  which  are 
bred  of  poverty  and  pride;  the  constant  tempta- 
tions to  raid  the  camels  and  cattle  of  other  tribes, 
with  the  sacred  obligation  which  binds  the  whole 
tribe  to  avenge  the  slaughter  of  one  of  its  mem- 
bers— all  these  create  a  climate  of  feud,  while  the 
necessity  of  living  in  shifting  camps,  and  the 
absence  (except  for  rare  moments  in  the  history) 
of  economic  or  military  interests  common  to  the 
whole  peninsula  and  of  an  authority  effective 
over  so  vast  and  wild  a  surface,  render  impossible 
any  policy  save  of  the  most  loose  and  friable 
kind.  Such  incoherence,  derived  from  resi- 
dence in  these  deserts  perhaps  for  millennia  be- 
fore the  race  broke  into  history,  has  cursed  to 
the  end  even  the  most  settled  and  progressive  of 
Semitic  peoples.  Israel  itself  is  an  illustration."1 

Perhaps  to  the  same  nomadic  origin  may  be 
traced  the  deep-seated  and  spontaneous  hos- 
tility to  foreigners  that  has  long  been  supposed 
to  be  instinctive  to  all  humankind.  The  law  and 
ethics  of  the  desert,  which  differ  little  from  the 
law  of  the  jungle,  were  not  completely  discarded 
with  the  crossing  of  the  Jordan.  Perhaps  not  in 
excess  of  many  other  peoples  in  the  same  stage 
of  culture,  yet  to  a  marked  degree,  the  Hebrews 
who  settled  Canaan  dealt  ruthlessly  with  their 
neighbors  and  enemies,  while  in  the  later  genera- 
tions they  developed  a  racial  exclusiveness  that 

1  George  Adam  Smith,  The  Early  Poetry  of  Israel,  pp.  27  /. 


POLITICAL  INHERITANCE  15 

was  only  equalled  by  the  hostile  reaction  of  anti- 
Semitism  which  it  met  among  all  other  peoples. 

Yet  in  the  historical  period  of  Hebrew  history, 
as  in  the  life  of  the  desert  before  it,  there  remained 
in  striking  contrast  to  the  belligerent  attitude  to 
alien  peoples  the  cordial  hospitality  to  individual 
aliens.  The  Hebrew  legislation  throughout  is  tol- 
erant and  merciful  toward  the  "stranger  within 
the  gates,"  and  many  narratives  attest  the  strong 
public  sentiment  by  which  such  laws  were  created 
and  maintained.  For  inhospitality  Sodom  met  a 
fate  that  made  it  a  watchword,  while  Lot  provi- 
dentially escaped  because  he  "entertained  angels 


unawares." 


Another  noble  heritage  from  desert  life  was 
the  strong  cohesive  bond  of  loyalty  that  bound 
together  the  members  of  the  tribe.  To  be  sure, 
at  first  the  motives  for  loyalty  were  merely  self- 
defense,  the  objects  of  loyalty  were  small  and 
conflicting,  and  the  expression  of  loyalty  was  in 
the  form  of  fanatical  revenge  and  destructive 
violence;  nevertheless,  in  course  of  time,  all  these 
limitations  could  be  transcended.  Mutual  service 
could  replace  mutual  defense;  loyalty  to  the  tribe 
could  become  loyalty  to  a  nation,  and  still  retain 
the  feeling  of  solidarity,  the  sense  of  social  obliga- 
tion, and  the  practice  of  self-forgetting  sacrifice. 
Hebrew  history  illustrates  all  these  forms  of  de- 
velopment. The  absence  of  individual  ambition 
in  many  chapters  of  Hebrew  history  is  only  the 


16  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

political  counterpart  of  that  sinking  of  the  indi- 
vidual which  is  so  marked  a  feature  in  Hebrew 
religion.  Both  are  equally  strange  to  more  mod- 
ern eyes,  and  both  are  doubtless  due  to  the  desert 
inheritance.  The  notable  indifference  to  the 
physical  life  of  the  individual  is  like  the  notable 
indifference  to  the  spiritual  life  of  the  individual. 
"The  reason/'  says  Professor  Smith,  "is  in  part 
the  fact  that  the  tribal  interests,  the  security, 
and  the  survival  of  the  tribe  in  this  life,  over- 
whelm the  individual's  interests,  and  the  impor- 
tance of  what  may  happen  to  him  hereafter."1 
It  is  no  accident  of  history  that  the  world  owes 
to  the  Jewish  race  so  many  expressions  of  the 
highest  vicarious  sacrifice — from  the  prophetic 
picture  of  Moses  praying  to  be  blotted  from  the 
book  of  life  for  his  people's  sins2  to  the  patriot 
martyr  of  Calvary. 

Thus  for  good  or  for  ill  the  ideals  of  a  nation 
were  founded  on  the  habits  of  long-forgotten 
ancestors.  So  the  nomad  blood  with  all  its  con- 
tradictory passions  and  instincts  flowed  in  the 
veins  of  the  children  of  Israel  to  more  than  a 
third  or  fourth  generation,  and  unconsciously 
affected  the  evolution  of  their  political  life  and 
thought.  New  environment,  a  new  civilization, 
new  ideals  modified  the  old  heritage  but  never 
completely  obliterated  it. 

i  Op.  tit.,  p.  38.  2Ex.  32:32. 


Ill 

THE  BIRTH  OF  THE  NATION 

To  few  nations  has  Providence  given  so  dra- 
matic a  beginning  as  the  Exodus  of  Israel  from 
Egypt.  In  most  cases  the  origins  of  national  life 
either  are  lost  in  obscurity  or  appear  as  the 
natural  evolution  of  slow  and  insignificant  factors. 
This  is,  no  doubt,  partly  true  of  Israel  as  well. 
There  is  much  in  its  early  history  that  is  now  lost 
to  view,  and  much  of  what  we  know  indicates 
that  the  Hebrew  nation  only  gradually  developed 
from  the  nomads  of  the  desert  to  the  chosen  peo- 
ple of  God.  Nevertheless,  the  Hebrew  nation 
clearly  dates  its  birth  back  to  a  distinct  era,  to  a 
definite  event.  Whatever  doubts  may  attach  to 
other  events  in  their  early  history,  the  story  of 
their  bondage  and  liberation  can  scarcely  be  an 
invention.  This  is  the  landmark  that  fixes  their 
birth,  and  to  this  their  historians  forever  turn 
back  in  grateful  memory.  Here  was  the  found- 
ing of  the  Hebrew  nation  and  the  beginning  of 
their  distinctive  national  life. 

The  story  of  the  Exodus  is  familiar  to  us  from 
childhood.  Historical  study  has  only  served  to 
make  its  details  more  realistic  and  vivid.  A  com- 

17 


18  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

pany  of  nomad  clans,  children  of  the  Arabian  des- 
ert, find  their  way  into  Egypt  in  search  of  more 
abundant  food.  In  course  of  time  the  ambitious 
rulers  of  the  land  impress  them  into  the  unwonted 
and  restrictive  labor  of  public  works,  and  reduce 
them  to  the  condition  of  virtual  serfs.  At  length, 
galled  by  this  yoke,  guided  by  the  inspired  enthu- 
siasm of  Moses,  and  aided  by  a  series  of  local 
calamities,  they  strike  for  freedom  and  make  good 
their  escape  to  the  free,  wild  life  of  the  desert. 
Such,  in  simplest  terms,  was  the  birth  of  the 
Hebrew  nation. 

The  religious  significance  of  this  event  has  long 
been  the  subject  of  earnest  discussion,  but  its 
political  significance  is  clear  beyond  all  argument. 
It  was  a  great  act  of  self-emancipation  and  the 
expression  of  the  inherent  love  of  human  liberty. 
Just  how  long  these  revolutionists  had  eaten  "  the 
bread  of  affliction  in  the  house  of  bondage"  our 
records  do  not  tell,  nor  can  we  be  sure  that  the 
earlier  freedom  of  the  desert  was  a  living  memory 
or  a  conscious  lure  to  them.  But  they  were  not 
of  the  servile  stock  of  Egypt,  and  when  their 
lives  were  made  bitter  they  felt  that  holy  dis- 
content which  brooks  no  opposition. 

That  the  Hebrews  in  Egypt  had  exercised  no 
political  control  goes  without  saying.  Local  au- 
tonomy they  doubtless  did  enjoy,  but  in  the 
greater  affairs  of  the  empire  of  the  Nile  they 
shared  with  countless  other  fellahin  complete  sub- 


BIRTH  OF  THE  NATION  19 

jection  to  the  will  of  the  king  or  the  ruling  priestly 
or  princely  caste.  Probably  they  expected  no 
voice  in  affairs  of  state:  such  a  conception  of  citi- 
zenship was  alien  to  all  antiquity  or  at  least  could 
only  be  suggested  when  lack  of  representation 
was  made  acute  by  its  non-political  results.  In- 
deed, the  Scripture  records  declare  that  the  op- 
pression which  inspired  their  unrest  was  not 
political  but  industrial.  Their  lives  were  made 
bitter,  not  by  want  of  franchise,  but  "with  hard 
service  in  mortar  and  in  brick,"  by  the  exploita- 
tion of  their  labor.  The  primary  political  mean- 
ing of  the  Exodus  was  the  liberation  from  indus- 
trial slavery,  though  with  this  liberation  came 
political  enfranchisement  as  well. 

A  second  factor  in  the  Exodus  of  Israel  was  the 
impulse  for  co-operation — an  impulse  which  in 
this  case,  as  in  so  many  others,  was  born  only 
out  of  the  dire  necessity  of  a  common  need. 
The  lesson  that  in  union  is  strength  was  learned 
once — if  not  once  for  all — in  the  first  national 
emergency  that  made  the  beginnings  of  the  real 
nation.  The  oppression  of  Ramses  could  con- 
tinue as  long  as  resistance  was  sporadic  and  un- 
organized. In  a  telling  incident  the  biographer 
of  Moses  reveals  the  futility  of  individual  effort 
(Ex.  2:11-15).  Moses'  first  reaction  to  oppres- 
sion was  the  angry  killing  of  an  Egyptian  task- 
master. This  deed  of  violence  produced  no  real 
relief,  but,  rather,  impaired  and  delayed  the  pos- 


20  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

sible  usefulness  of  the  slayer  for  furthering  his 
patriotic  ideals.  In  the  end  the  relief  came 
through  the  more  gradual  method  of  patient  in- 
sistence on  rights  and  the  education  of  the  op- 
pressed to  work  together  for  their  common  good. 
And,  as  repeatedly  since  throughout  history,  na- 
tional liberty  was  found  possible  only  through 
national  unity.  The  two  are  forged  together. 

But  the  third  factor  of  the  Exodus  was  indi- 
vidual— the  leadership  of  Moses.  Through  the 
accretions  of  legend  that  have  gathered  about  his 
name  can  still  be  discerned  the  political  signifi- 
cance of  the  great  Hebrew  leader.  In  him  all  the 
meaning  and  glory  of  the  Exodus  are  summed  up, 
and  he  is  a  convincing  example  of  the  power  of 
personal  initiative  in  the  history  of  nations. 
Futile  though  individual  effort  often  proves  when 
isolated,  it  is  most  effective  when  associated  with 
others  in  leadership.  Without  such  leadership 
national  progress  seems  well-nigh  impossible. 
"Israel,"  it  has  been  said,  "perhaps  more  than 
any  other  nation  owes  its  distinction  to  a  few 
individuals.  Poorly  endowed  as  a  people  with 
the  qualities  which  lead  to  national  success,  being 
gifted  with  tenacity  and  retentiveness  rather  than 
power  of  initiation,  it  has  been  indebted  for  its 
position  amongst  mankind  to  a  few  commanding 
personalities.  Among  these  Moses  occupies  a 
foremost  place."1 

1 G.  W.  Wade,  Old  Testament  History,  p.  132. 


BIRTH  OF  THE  NATION  21 

It  is  needless  to  say  that  these  political  factors 
of  the  Exodus  were  indelibly  stamped  on  the  later 
life  of  the  nation.  The  event  itself  was  never 
forgotten.  It  was  celebrated  annually  in  a  feast 
of  rejoicing,  in  which  the  love  of  liberty  was  for- 
ever renewed  under  the  sanctions  of  religion. 
The  passover  was  more  than  an  act  of  worship. 
It  was  the  holiday  of  national  independence. 
The  love  of  liberty  which  had  called  the  nation 
into  being  was  repeatedly  roused  in  memory 
amid  its  later  vicissitudes.  The  very  existence  of 
the  Hebrew  people  served  not  merely  as  a  monu- 
ment of  protest  against  industrial  slavery  like 
that  in  Egypt;  it  was  a  charter  of  independence 
for  political  and  for  religious  liberty  as  well. 
There  is  something  intensely  modern  in  this 
national  aspiration  for  freedom,  that  anticipates 
by  three  thousand  years  the  "spirit  of  76"  and 
the  French  tricolor  cockade.  Throughout  his 
history  for  all  these  years  the  enslaved  Jew  has 
been  able  to  trace  back  his  rebel  spirit  to  the 
shepherd  by  the  burning  bush,  to  the  great  co- 
operative venture  of  faith  of  his  fellow  rebels, 
and  to  the  triumphant  vindication  of  freedom 
and  of  faith  that  cried  over  the  fallen  oppressor: 

"Sing ye  to  Jehovah,  for  he  hath  triumphed  gloriously; 
The  horse  and  his  rider  hath  he  thrown  into  the  sea." 

For  the  cause  of  freedom  cannot  and  could  not 
be  regarded  as  merely  a  political  issue.  It  was  a 


22  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

religious  and  moral  issue  as  well.  It  was  Jeho- 
vah, as  well  as  Moses,  who  had  heard  the  cry  of 
bondage,  and  it  was  by  his  guidance  and  power 
that  liberation  was  achieved.  By  manifest  signs 
God  identified  himself  with  the  interests  of  the 
refugees — not  merely  because  they  were  his  peo- 
ple, but  because  their  cause  was  just.  No  matter 
how  partisan  and  unethical  the  ideas  of  God  may 
have  been  in  those  or  even  later  days,  the  Exodus 
proved  that  God  was  on  the  side  of  right  and  not 
of  might.  And  no  matter  how  blind  to  the 
claims  of  equality  and  fraternity  were  the  wor- 
shippers of  Jehovah,  there  was  always  at  least  a 
cogent  humanitarian  reminder  in  the  lawgiver's 
refrain:  "Remember  that  thou  wast  a  bondman 
in  the  land  of  Egypt,  and  Jehovah  thy  God  re- 
deemed thee."  Though  the  religious  view-point 
of  the  historians  of  the  Exodus  doubtless  obscures 
many  political  details,  it  has  nevertheless  sur- 
rounded this  great  struggle  for  freedom  with  an 
atmosphere  of  moral  earnestness  that  is  both 
appropriate  and  significant,  purifying  patriotic 
enthusiasm  with  the  transcendent  sacredness  of  a 
universal  ideal.  Into  one  event  were  crowded 
the  motives  of  religious  liberty,  political  indepen- 
dence, and  industrial  emancipation — motives  that 
in  other  nations,  like  the  American,  have  been 
successive  legacies  of  different  generations.  And 
this  event  became,  therefore,  the  corner-stone  of 


BIRTH  OF  THE  NATION  23 

that  Hebrew  love  of  liberty  which,  in  its  nobler 
moments,  shared  the  altruism  of  the  poet  Lowell: 

"Is  true  freedom  but  to  break 
Fetters  for  our  own  dear  sake, 
And,  with  leathern  hearts,  forget 
That  we  owe  mankind  a  debt? 
No !  true  freedom  is  to  share 
All  the  chains  our  brothers  wear, 
And,  with  heart  and  hand,  to  be 
Earnest  to  make  others  free  I" 


IV 

CONTACT   WITH   CULTURE 

IN  their  sojourn  in  Egypt  the  Israelites  appear 
to  have  been  little  affected  by  the  superior  cultu're 
of  the  land  of  the  Nile.  Though  we  are  assured 
by  a  Christian  writer  that  "Moses  was  instructed 
In  all  the  wisdom  of  the  Egyptians/'  there  is 
much  more  evidence  that  his  religious  and  legal 
.ideals  were  influenced  by  an  obscure  bedouin 
tribe  near  Sinai,  with  which  he  associated  during 
his  exile,  than  that  they  were  affected  by  the 
court  of  Pharaoh.  "He  refused  to  be  called  the 
son  of  Pharaoh's  daughter,"  though  he  accepted 
apparently  both  the  kinship  and  the  religion  of 
his  Kenite  father-in-law,  and  so  remained  essen- 
tially a  child  of  the  desert.  So,  also,  his  fellow 
refugees  show  no  trace  of  the  civilization  of 
Egypt,  except  a  passing  memory  of  its  flesh- 
pots  and  succulent  vegetables  (Ex.  16:3;  Num. 
11:5).  When  they  enter  the  land  of  promise 
they  are  typical  nomads.  Several  reasons  com- 
bine to  explain  this  fact.  Their  contact  with 
Egypt  was,  after  all,  superficial.  They  are  rep- 
resented as  living  apart  in  the  land  of  Goshen 
and  as  still  employed  in  tending  their  flocks. 
Even  when  they  were  made  "to  serve  with  rigor" 

24 


CONTACT  WITH  CULTURE  25 

on  public  works  they  were  not  thereby  exposed  to 
the  ancient  culture  of  the  land,  for,  as  has  been 
found  by  more  modern  nations,  the  industrial 
exploitation  of  backward  peoples  does  not  tend 
to  civilize  them.  The  duration  of  their  sojourn 
in  Egypt  is  a  matter  of  doubt.  Archaeological 
evidence  suggests  that  only  some  of  the  tribes 
later  affiliated  were  ever  in  Egypt  at  all,  while 
the  Bible  insists  that  the  whole  generation  of 
Moses  died  before  the  crossing  of  the  Jordan. 

The  first  real  contact  with  civilization  in  He- 
brew history  must  be  dated,  therefore,  with  the 
settlement  of  Canaan.  Here  was  an  experience 
that  influenced  deeply  and  permanently  the  whole 
nature  of  Hebrew  national  life.  Between  the 
nomads  of  the  desert  and  the  Canaanites,  or 
Amorites,  as  the  natives  appear  to  be  called  indif- 
ferently, there  existed  a  series  of  distinctions  that 
affected  their  political,  social,  industrial,  moral, 
and  religious  life.  Probably  both  the  immigrants 
and  the  natives  of  Canaan  at  this  period  belonged 
to  the  same  (Semitic)  race,  and  possibly  they 
spoke  the  same  language.  But  the  standards  of 
the  settled  Amorites  differed  in  many  points  from 
the  standards  of  the  desert.1  In  part  this  differ- 
ence of  the  Canaanites  was  due  to  their  contact 
with  the  older  cultures  of  the  Euphrates  and  the 
Nile.  The  Tel-el-Amarna  tablets,  written  in 
cuneiform  characters  by  the  Egyptian  governors 
1  See  Chapter  II. 


26  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

in  Palestine  not  long  before  the  advent  of  the 
Hebrews,  are  a  striking  testimony  to  the  joint 
influence  of  these  two  ancient  centres  of  civiliza- 
tion upon  the  land  that  lay  like  a  bone  of  conten- 
tion between  them.  The  main  cause  of  the  Ca- 
naanites'  culture  was,  however,  the  physical  cir- 
cumstances of  their  life.  And  for  this  reason  it 
was  more  certain  to  affect  the  nomads  of  the 
desert  as  they  came  into  the  same  environment. 

The  most  obvious  difference  was  in  occupation. 
The  nomad  herded  flocks,  the  Canaanite  engaged, 
besides,  in  agriculture.  The  latter  had,  there- 
fore, abandoned  the  wandering  life  in  tents  and 
had  built  houses,  villages,  and  even  walled  towns. 
Their  diet  included  now  not  only  annual  crops, 
like  grain,  but  even  the  fruits,  the  grapes,  and 
the  wine  that  implied  the  prolonged  residence  in 
one  place  and  the  perennial  culture  of  the  olive 
and  the  vine.  For  agriculture  new  implements 
were  needed,  and  with  settled  life  household  fur- 
niture could  be  expanded  beyond  what  was  easily 
portable.  In  addition  to  the  city  walls  with 
which  the  Canaanites  defended  themselves,  the 
Hebrew  historian  mentions  among  their  achieve- 
ments in  military  science  their  "  chariots  of  iron." 

These  material  elements  of  civilization  pro- 
duced, of  course,  their  own  characteristic  ideals 
and  institutions.  Private  ownership  of  land  and 
chattel  slavery  are  two  far-reaching  economic  re- 
sults of  the  transition  from  a  nomad  to  an  agri- 


CONTACT  WITH  CULTURE  27 

t 

cultural  society.  And  these  economic  changes 
produced  new  social  standards  of  rich  and  poor, 
of  urban  and  rural,  of  inferior  and  superior.  Even 
new  standards  of  morality  are  evolved,  since  new 
problems  in  justice  arise,  and  new  opportunities 
occur  for  antisocial  conduct. 

Political  ideals  are  also  different  in  a  settled 
population  like  that  of  Canaan.  In  the  new 
classifications  of  society  with  its  contrasts,  some 
of  the  simpler  democracy  disappears.  Monarch- 
ical government  becomes  more  pronounced,  or, 
at  least,  the  prestige  of  the  prosperous  land- 
owners. The  worth  of  the  individual  is  mini- 
mized. The  political  integration  also  changes  its 
basis,  and  the  unit  is  formed  by  geographical 
unity  rather  than  by  kinship.  The  fiction  of 
relationship  is  often  long  maintained,  but  in 
Canaan,  as  elsewhere,  tribal  names  become  place 
names.  Nationality  becomes  local,  not  racial, 
and  national  ambitions  become  closely  associated 
with  the  material  interests  of  a  community. 

Religion  in  Canaan  was  somewhat  different 
from  that  of  the  desert.  As  the  most  conserva- 
tive of  human  institutions  it  perhaps  differed  less 
than  other  elements  of  life,  but  still  the  difference 
was  well  recognized.  Over  against  the  Jehovah 
of  the  nomads  stand  the  baals  of  the  Amorites. 
For  in  settled  life  religion,  too,  can  be  localized 
and  the  place  of  a  man's  residence  determines  his 
religion  quite  as  much  as  it  determines  his  politi- 


28  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

cal  adherence.  Every  nation  had  its  own  god, 
and  in  the  subdivided  political  life  of  the  Canaan- 
ites  every  village  or  town  had  its  baal.  These 
baals  were  looked  upon  as  interested  in  the  affairs 
of  their  worshippers,  including  not  only  cattle- 
raising  and  warfare,  as  in  the  desert,  but  the  agri- 
cultural pursuits  as  well.  They  were  worshipped 
with  vegetable  sacrifices  as  well  as  animal.  Their 
festivals,  like  the  annual  feast  at  Shiloh  (Judges 
21:19)  and  the  harvest  festival  at  Shechem 
(Judges  9:27)  were  regulated  by  the  farmer's 
seasons.  "New  wine,  which  cheereth  God  and 
man/'  flowed  freely.  That  drunkenness  and 
other  license  characterized  these  occasions  was  a 
difference  noticeable  to  the  more  ascetic  visitors 
from  the  desert. 

The  general  sketch  of  the  characteristics  of 
Amorite  life  as  thus  presented,  even  without  fur- 
ther elaboration  and  historical  proof  of  the  differ- 
entiating details,  will  probably  be  sufficient  to 
establish  the  influence  of  the  settlement  of  Canaan 
on  the  final  standards  of  the  Hebrew  nation,  in- 
cluding their  political  ideas.  Here  is  a  conflict 
of  civilizations  or,  rather,  a  conflict  between  civ- 
ilization and  nomadism.  This  is  the  thesis  that 
is  clearly  and  emphatically  driven  home  by  Pro- 
fessor Wallis  throughout  his  book,  The  Sociological 
Study  of  the  Bible  :  "  The  social  group  known  as 
fthe  Hebrew  nation'  came  slowly  into  existence,  in 
the  land  of  Canaan ,  at  the  point  of  junction  between 


CONTACT  WITH  CULTURE  29 

two  previously  hostile  races,  the  Israelites  and  the 
Amorites." 

The  story  of  this  coalescence  is  one  of  extreme 
interest.  To  understand  it  one  must  first  exam- 
ine the  historical  facts  about  the  settlement  of 
Canaan.  In  spite  of  the  statements  of  later 
historians  it  now  appears  evident  that  the  He- 
brews did  not  suddenly  and  completely  destroy 
the  Canaanites  before  them.  Early  statements 
in  the  first  chapters  of  Judges  and  scattered  else- 
where in  our  records  indicate  that  from  large  sec- 
tions of  the  country,  especially  from  the  fertile 
lowlands  with  their  walled  towns,  the  invaders 
"did  not  utterly  drive  out"  the  inhabitants.  To 
the  later  historian,  who  thought  that  everything 
undesirable  was  characteristic  of  "the  iniquity  of 
the  Amorite,"  it  seemed  natural  that  God  should 
command  and  that  Joshua  should  execute  their 
annihilation.  But  annihilation  is  almost  always 
impossible,  and  is  rarely  the  actual  method  of 
invaders,  especially  such  feeble,  disorganized,  and 
sporadic  invaders  as  throughout  the  centuries 
overflow  Palestine  from  the  desert. 

That  the  first  relations  between  Hebrew  and 
Canaanite  were  hostile  must  be  granted,  and  for 
many  years  conflicts  occurred  between  them. 
By  such  events  were  inspired  the  ancient  Song 
of  Deborah  and  many  of  the  early  epics  of  the 
Book  of  the  Wars  of  Jehovah.  But  the  impression 
one  gets  from  the  prose  narratives  of  Judges  is 


30  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

that  these  conflicts  were  local  and  temporary, 
and  that  none,  not  even  the  famous  battle  of 
Megiddo,  belongs  to  the  list  of  decisive  battles. 
And  it  is  worth  while  to  consider  the  other  rela- 
tions that  existed  between  these  two  peoples, 
apart  from  the  incidents  of  guerilla  warfare. 

There  was  much  which  may  be  called  "peace- 
ful penetration. "  In  many  districts  the  nomads 
from  the  desert  simply  pastured  their  cattle  in 
the  unoccupied  uplands  without  disturbing  their 
neighbors  in  the  valleys.  Sometimes  property 
was  acquired  by  purchase,  as  David  bought  a 
threshing-floor  from  the  Jebusite  Araunah  (II 
Sam.  24:24;  c/.  Abraham's  purchase  of  the  field  of 
Machpelah,  Gen.  23),  or  by  marriage.  For  many 
years  cities  like  Jebus  (Jerusalem)  and  Gezer  re- 
mained in  the  hands  of  the  Canaanites.  But 
generally,  as  the  Book  of  Judges  describes  the 
situation,  "the  children  of  Israel  dwelt  among 
the  Canaanites,  the  Hittites,  and  the  Amorites, 
and  the  Perizzites,  and  the  Hivites,  and  the  Jebu- 
sites;  and  they  took  their  daughters  to  be  their 
wives,  and  gave  their  own  daughters  to  their  sons 
and  served  their  gods"  (Judges  3:5,  6). 

The  story  of  Abimelech  (Judges  9),  though  his 
joint  rule  over  Canaanites  and  Israelites  was  only 
local  and  short-lived,  illustrates  the  possibilities 
of  political  rapprochement  in  the  period  of  fusion, 
and,  like  the  other  stories  in  the  Book  of  Judges, 
"gives  us,"  as  Professor  Moore  has  said,  "a 


CONTACT  WITH  CULTURE  31 

glimpse  of  the  relations  between  the  two  peoples 
thus  brought  side  by  side.  The  Canaanite  town, 
Shechem,  subject  to  Jerubbaal  of  Ophrah;  his 
half -Canaanite  son,  Abimelech,  who  naturally 
belongs  to  his  mother's  people;  the  successful 
appeal  to  blood,  'which  is  thicker  than  water,' 
by  which  he  becomes  king  of  Shechem,  ruling  as 
well  over  the  neighboring  Israelites;  the  inter- 
loper Gaal  and  his  kinsmen,  who  settle  in  Shechem 
and  instigate  insurrection  against  Abimelech  by 
skilfully  appealing  to  the  pride  of  the  Shechemite 
aristocracy — all  help  us  better  than  anything 
else  in  the  book  to  realize  the  situation  in  this 
period."1 

The  results  of  the  coalescence  between  Israelites 
and  Canaanites  were  not  simple  or  one-sided.  As 
a  name  the  Canaanites  disappear,  lingering  long- 
est in  a  separate  capacity  in  the  more  advanced 
arts  of  civilization,  as  smiths,  merchants,  and 
warriors.  The  resultant  population  were  called 
Hebrews  and  the  land  became  the  land  of  Israel, 
except  Judah,  though  this  and  some  of  the  other 
tribal  names  were  probably  of  Israelite  origin  as 
well.2  Similarly  in  religion  the  name  of  Jehovah 
prevailed  over  the  baals,  and  he  is  identified  with 
the  interests  of  the  whole  land  and  people.  But 

1 G.  F.  Moore,  "Judges,"  International  Critical  Commentary, 
pp.238/. 

2  It  should,  however,  not  be  forgotten  that  Egyptian  rec- 
ords speak  of  Asher  and  even  of  Israel  in  Canaan  long  before 
the  Exodus. 


32  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

the  influence  of  Canaanites  on  Hebrews  was  no 
smaller  than  the  reverse.  Even  where  the  He- 
brews were  finally  victorious  in  war,  the  customs 
and  ways  of  their  subjects  affected  their  own. 
As  so  often  has  been  proved  in  history,  military 
success  determines  neither  cultural  nor  political 
ideals.  As  vanquished  Greece  gave  her  arts  to 
Rome,  and  as  the  fall  of  Rome  only  civilized  the 
barbarian  victors,  so  the  nomad  invaders  of 
Canaan  soon  succumbed  to  the  ideals  and  insti- 
tutions of  the  more  civilized  Canaanites.  And 
thereby  the  nomadic  heritage  of  the  Hebrew  peo- 
ple became  completely  transformed. 

It  is  possible  to  mention  by  way  of  illustration 
two  ways  in  which  the  settlement  of  Canaan 
affected  the  national  ideals  of  the  Hebrews.  Pos- 
sibly in  each  case  the  new  conception  was  empha- 
sized by  the  contrast  with  the  earlier  life  of  the 
desert.  In  the  first  place,  it  is  evident  that  even 
prior  to  the  settlement  the  land  appeared  to  the 
eyes  of  the  nomads,  though  it  would  not  so  now 
appear  to  most  residents  of  Europe  and  America, 
a  land  of  plenty.  Its  first  appeal  to  the  tentative 
invader  would  not  be  the  corn,  the  wine,  and  the 
oil — products  of  agriculture — but  its  superior 
supply  of  nomad  foods,  a  land  flowing  with  milk 
and  honey.  But  as  the  Hebrews  settled  in  the 
land  and  tasted  the  blessings  of  civilization,  all 
the  more  advanced  forms  of  material  prosperity 
Appealed  to  them.  If  the  ideals  of  the  desert 


CONTACT  WITH  CULTURE  33 

expressed  themselves  in  the  blessings  of  war,  the 
ideals  of  Canaan  added  the  blessings  of  peace. 
Certainly  those  early  poems  which,  in  the  form 
of  benedictions  pronounced  by  the  dying  patri- 
archs and  Moses,  portray  the  Hebrew  standards 
of  national  desire,  emphasize  the  increase  of  the 
field  no  less  than  the  increase  of  the  flock  and 
the  victory  of  battle. 

"  See,  the  smell  of  my  son  [Israel] 
Is  as  the  smell  of  a  field  which  Jehovah  hath  blessed. 
And  God  give  thee  of  the  dew  of  heaven, 
And  of  the  fatness  of  the  earth, 
And  plenty  of  grain  and  new  wine: 
Let  peoples  serve  thee, 
And  nations  bow  down  to  thee."  l 

Throughout  much  of  later  literature  the  language 
of  agricultural  prosperity  was  used  to  symbolize, 
if  not  literally  to  describe,  the  fulfilment  of 
national  hopes. 

In  the  second  place  the  transition  from  no- 
madic to  settled  life  at  once  made  possible  the 
intimate  identification  of  the  people  with  a  defi- 
nite piece  of  land.  In  the  desert  there  are  neither 
individual  nor  collective  rights  in  property  as 
real  estate;  at  most  may  be  found  collective 
property  rights  in  water.  But  in  settled  life  we 
get  both  private  ownership  of  land  and  public 
sovereignty.  Now  in  Canaan  Israel  developed  a 
sense  of  local  sovereignty  rarely  surpassed  by 
1  Gen.  27:27  ff.;  cf.  Gen.  49;  Deut.  33. 


34  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

any  people.  As  we  have  said,  Canaan  became 
their  land,  and  the  title  was  secured  both  by 
promise  and  by  conquest.  In  both  respects  this 
made  ownership  a  divine  right.  The  conquest 
was  God's  gift,  carried  on  by  his  direction.  This 
was  no  uncommon  idea  in  antiquity  and  Israel 
was  as  willing  to  grant  the  same  sanction  to  other 
nations.  As  Jephthah  says  to  the  King  of 
Ammon: 

Wilt  thou  not  possess  that  which  Chemosh  thy  God 
giveth  thee  to  possess?  So  whomsoever  Jehovah  our 
God  hath  dispossessed  from  before  us,  them  will  we 
possess.1 

But  in  Israel's  case  the  title  was  conceived  of  as 
granted  in  perpetuum.  The  repeated  promises  of 
God  made  to  the  patriarchs  and  Moses  in  the  pages 
of  the  Pentateuch  are  a  reflection  of  the  strong 
sense  of  special  sanction  which  existed  through- 
out later  history.  The  actual  loss  of  the  land  by 
conquest  in  no  way  annulled  the  deed.  Rather 
in  exile  the  sense  of  ownership  grew  with  the 
longings  of  memory.  It  was  still  the  promised 
land.  And  even  to-day,  after  centuries  of  dis- 
possession, the  geographical  element  in  national- 
ism is  perhaps  best  exemplified  by  the  ambitions 
of  the  Zionist  Jew. 

1  Judges  11:24.  The  whole  passage,  though  perhaps  of 
Deuteronomic  origin,  is  an  interesting  discussion  of  the  law 
of  sovereignty. 


THE   PERSISTENCE   OF  NATIONAL  CONTRASTS 

IT  is  convenient  to  describe  historical  processes 
in  simple  terms,  but  the  historical  facts  are  not 
usually  so  simple.  Thus  we  must  guard  against 
supposing  that  the  fusion  of  races  and  cultures 
described  in  the  preceding  chapter  resulted  really 
in  a  perfectly  homogeneous  civilization.  The 
process  did  not  advance  with  equal  pace  in  all 
elements  of  life  or  in  all  places  or  persons.  The 
transition  from  nomads  to  farmers  was  not  made 
at  a  stroke,  and  one  can  recognize  to-day  on  the 
borders  of  the  desert  the  half-nomadic  stage 
which  is  reflected  by  the  Book  of  Genesis,  although 
the  author  writes  at  a  time  so  late  that  when  he 
recalls  the  age  of  the  patriarchs  his  readers  must 
be  reminded  that  "the  Canaanite  was  then  in 
the  land."  1  Judah  and  Gilead,  with  their  closer 
relations  to  the  desert  and  their  inferior  oppor- 
tunities for  agriculture,  long  stood  in  contrast 
with  the  richer  lands  of  middle  and  northern  Pal- 
estine. The  notorious  political  independence  of 
the  southern  tribes  may  be  due  in  part  to  this 
economic  distinction.  Thus  the  contrast  between 

.  12:6. 
35 


36  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

cultures  which  was  formerly  racial  became  geo- 
graphical. And  even  where  the  two  forms  of 
culture  were  closely  mixed  the  contrast  and  the 
incongruity  remained  evident  long  after  the  race 
lines  disappeared.  Comparisons  of  standards 
were  possible  and  the  comparisons  were  often 
odious.  It  seemed  to  David  anomalous  that  he 
should  "dwell  in  a  house  of  cedar,  but  the  ark  of 
God  dwelleth  within  curtains."  1  Particularly  in 
religion  the  fusion  between  Jehovah  and  the 
baals  was  difficult,  and  as  late  as  the  time  of 
Hosea  the  contrast  between  them  was  as  great  as 
ever  before.  This  is  not  the  place  to  inquire  into 
the  exact  method  of  syncretism  which  did  occur, 
and,  indeed,  the  evidence  is  not  abundant.  But 
it  is  probable  that  several  tendencies  worked  at 
the  same  time:  the  subdivision  of  the  single  Jeho- 
vah into  a  whole  series  of  local  divinities,  the 
coalescing  of  the  separate  baals  into  the  single 
Jehovah. 

The  lines  of  cleavage  between  the  contrasting 
standards  which  succeeded  the  racial  alignment 
were  social  and  moral.  As  Wallis  says:  "Al- 
though the  distinction  between  Israelite  and 
Amorite  was  at  length  wiped  out,  the  social  strug- 
gle unconsciously  followed  the  original  race  lines. 
The  moral  codes  of  the  city  capitalist  and  the 
nomad  were  brought  into  active  collision  within 
the  limits  of  one  and  the  same  social  group.  Two 
1 II  Sam.  7:2. 


PERSISTENCE  OF  CONTRASTS  37 

different  standpoints  were  brought  into  sharp 
contrast  in  the  development  of  the  Hebrew  na- 
tion. This  fundamental  variance  comes  to  the 
surface  over  and  over  again."  1 

The  expression  of  the  cleavage,  however,  rarely 
took  the  form  of  economic  or  moral  definition. 
Rather,  following  the  genius  of  Hebrew  thought, 
it  expressed  itself  in  religious  terms.  In  the 
third  and  final  stage  the  conflict  was  phrased  not 
as  war  between  Israel  and  Canaanites,  not  as  a 
quarrel  between  ascetic  simplicity  and  the  luxury 
of  unrighteous  wealth,  but  as  the  conflict  be- 
tween Jehovah  and  the  baals.  Thus,  according  to 
Wallis,  "the  conflict  between  the  moral  stand- 
points inherited  from  the  Israelites  and  Amorites 
was  at  last  viewed  as  a  rivalry  between  Jehovah 
and  Baal.  The  moral  struggle  was  figured  as  a 
cult  war."  2 

For  the  elaboration  of  the  process  so  summarily 
here  described  we  must  again  refer  the  reader  to 
the  work  already  quoted.  But  in  order  that  the 
influence  of  the  old  struggle  in  its  new  forms  upon 
the  ideals  of  the  Hebrews  may  be  understood,  it 
may  be  well  here  to  collect  some  examples  of  the 
persistence  of  the  older  nomadic  standards. 
Throughout  the  long  period  of  the  Hebrew  king- 
dom there  were  never  lacking  men  who  protested 
against  one  or  another  phase  of  the  new  culture. 

1  Sociological  Study  of  the  Bibk,  p.  94. 
9  Ibid.,  p.  197. 


38  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

Sometimes  their  motive  was  economic,  sometimes 
moral,  sometimes  religious.  It  cannot  in  all 
cases  be  determined,  though,  as  has  been  said,  it 
almost  always  takes  the  religious  form.  The 
protestants  were  sometimes  simply  temperamen- 
tal conservatives,  sometimes  they  were  hereditary 
sects  like  the  Rechabites,  but  the  most  obvious 
and  most  notable  objectors  were  the  vigorous 
reformers  that  we  call  the  prophets.  These  men 
were  inspired,  so  far  as  we  can  see,  neither  by 
stubborn  reaction  nor  by  personal  social  griev- 
ance, but  by  their  sensitive  moral  conscience  and 
their  deep  interest  in  the  highest  ideals  for  their 
nation. 

To  our  minds  the  most  arbitrary  conservatism 
finds  its  expression  in  the  limitations  of  the  cul- 
tus.  In  worship,  if  anywhere  in  the  unchanging 
East,  innovation  is  peculiarly  taboo.  To  this 
category  belong  the  restrictions  forbidding  altars 
of  hewn  stone,  or  molten  images.  Like  the  ritual 
use  of  knives  of  flint,  they  are  preferences  for  the 
customs  of  the  stone  age.  In  the  story  of  Cain 
and  Abel  the  farmer  and  the  shepherd  are  con- 
trasted and  their  respective  types  of  offering. 
No  moral  reason  is  suggested,  but  we  are  plainly 
told  God's  preference  for  the  latter: 

And  Jehovah  had  respect  unto  Abel  and  to  his  offer- 
ing; but  unto  Cain  and  to  his  offering  he  had  not 
respect." » 

.  4:4,  5. 


PERSISTENCE  OF  CONTRASTS  39 

Equally  neutral  from  the  moral  standpoint 
were  the  restrictions  of  the  Rechabites.  De- 
scended from  the  nomad  tribe  of  Kenites,  they 
maintained  the  ways  of  the  desert  by  the  strict 
provision  of  their  ascetic  order: 

Ye  shall  drink  no  wine,  neither  ye,  nor  your  sons, 
for  ever:  neither  shall  ye  build  house,  nor  sow  seed, 
nor  plant  vineyard,  nor  have  any;  but  all  your  days 
ye  shall  dwell  in  tents.1 

Thus  by  their  lives  rather  than  by  their  words 
they  offered  a  living  protest  against  the  innova- 
tions of  civilization. 

The  economic  complaints  of  the  conservative 
protestants  appear  generally  to  be  based  on 
grounds  of  social  justice.  Thus  while  to  Recha- 
bites and  to  Nazirites  the  drinking  of  wine  may 
have  been  at  first  a  matter  of  ritual  taboo,  by  the 
prophets  it  is  condemned  primarily  as  a  mark  of 
luxury  and  social  injustice.  The  owning  of  real 
estate  also  has  its  moral  snare.  It  leads  to  houses 
of  ivory  and  all  the  attendant  social  inequality, 
to  the  ousting  of  little  landowners  by  land  mo- 
nopolists, until  they  "dwell  alone  in  the  midst 
of  the  land."  The  notorious  injustice  of  Jezebel 
in  securing  Naboth's  vineyard  naturally  roused 
the  ire  of  a  prophet,  like  the  injustice  of  the 
polygamous  David  in  securing  Uriah's  wife.  Nor 
are  we  surprised  to  read  that  Jehonadab,  the 
iJer.35:6,7. 


40  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

founder  of  the  Rechabite  order,  was  heart  to 
heart  in  sympathy  with  Jehu's  bloody  overthrow  of 
Jezebel  and  of  the  whole  house  of  Ahab.  In  fact, 
the  whole  social  programme  of  the  prophets  is  a 
cry  of  the  poor  against  the  luxury,  the  oppression, 
the  miscarriage  of  justice,  and  all  the  other  abuses 
of  highly  civilized  society.  They  miss  the  old 
democracy  of  the  desert,  and  on  behalf  of  the 
proletariat  they  score  the  greed  and  tyranny  of 
the  rulers.  It  is  not  surprising  that  they  came 
in  many  cases  from  the  more  backward  country, 
as  Amos  came  from  Tekoa  and  Elijah  from 
Tishbeh.  Even  in  the  stories  of  the  building  of 
Babel  and  of  the  cities  of  the  plain,  we  seem  to 
hear  a  little  of  the  prophetic  feeling  that  "God 
made  the  country  but  man  made  the  town." 

It  was  inevitable  that  the  complaints  against 
abuse  of  power  should  be  sometimes  converted 
into  attacks  against  the  whole  institution  of  gov- 
ernment. The  king  himself  was  most  subject  to 
temptation,  and  most  responsible  for  injustice  by 
his  nobles.  And  several  kings  received  more 
serious  treatment  from  the  hands  of  the  prophets 
than  the  mere  rebukes  of  Nathan  and  Elijah.  It 
is  probable  that  several  of  the  revolutions  that 
were  attempted  against  a  reigning  monarch  were 
inspired  and  assisted  by  these  champions  of  the 
people.  David  gathered  the  malcontents  under 
Saul,  and  was  aided  by  the  prophet  Samuel;  Ab- 
salom made  capital  of  the  alleged  miscarriage  of 


PERSISTENCE  OF  CONTRASTS  41 

justice  by  his  father.  The  oppressive  system  of 
forced  labor  that  characterized  the  house  of  Sol- 
omon was  a  potent  cause  of  the  successful  revolt 
of  Jeroboam.  And  this  was  encouraged  by  the 
prophet  Ahijah.  Elisha  inspired  the  double  revo- 
lution carried  out  in  Israel  and  Judah  by  Jehu; 
and  later  Hosea  promises  vengeance  on  the  house 
of  Jehu  and  the  end  of  his  kingdom.  Other  illus- 
trations could  be  given. 

It  is  probably  in  this  connection  that  we  are  to 
understand  the  prophetic  criticism  of  the  whole 
institution  of  kingship.  Parallel  to  an  earlier  ac- 
count which  seems  to  approve  the  introduction  of 
a  monarch,  another  writer  considers  it  an  innova- 
tion that  first  takes  place  in  the  time  of  Saul,  in 
imitation  of  the  more  civilized  nations,  and  con- 
demns it  apparently  on  economic  grounds.  The 
elaborate  description  of  "the  manner  of  the  king" 
(I  Sam.  8:11-18),  with  his  heavy  requisitioning 
of  both  labor  and  property,  is  no  doubt  based  on 
experience  and  expresses  the  reaction  against  op- 
pressive monarchical  government  which  later 
ended  with  the  kingless  theocratic  ideal.1 

In  religion  as  in  government  the  reaction  against 
abuse  becomes  a  reaction  against  the  institu- 
tion as  a  whole.  This  probably  explains  why 
the  prophets  condemned  the  high  places  and  even 
the  whole  institution  of  sacrifice.  The  former 
were  the  local  sanctuaries  where,  prior  to  the 
1  See  also  Chapter  IX. 


42  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

reformation  of  Josiah,  Jehovah  was  worshipped 
with  the  full  approval  of  the  current  law.1  No 
doubt  these  had  originally  been  used  for  the  wor- 
ship of  baals,  and  in  not  all  of  them  had  the  substi- 
tution of  Jehovah  for  the  baal  been  carried  through, 
nor  the  growing  monotheism  of  the  prophets  be- 
come entirely  understood.  But  the  chief  objec- 
tion to  them  was  moral.  The  worship  carried  on 
at  many  of  these  places,  whether  in  the  name  of 
Jehovah  or  of  a  baal,  offended  the  consciences  of 
the  prophets.  If  drinking  is  condemned  because 
based  on  social  injustice,  it  is  a  particular  offense 
when  men  drink  in  the  house  of  their  God  the 
wine  of  those  that  have  been  fined  and  lie  down  on 
garments  taken  in  pledge.  Sexual  immorality  is 
also  objectionable  to  the  prophet;  how  much 
more  so  when  carried  on  in  its  most  objectionable 
forms,  at  the  high  places,  as  a  regular  part  of 
worship.  To  the  writer  of  the  Deuteronomic  code 
and  to  those  who  attempted  to  enforce  it,  the 
simplest  cure  for  these  ills  was  the  most  drastic 
— the  complete  abolition  of  all  the  sanctuaries 
except  Jerusalem.2 

It  is  already  evident  that  the  prophets  in  their 
attack  on  Canaanite  innovations  could  scarcely 
stop  with  those  things  for  which  a  Canaanite 
origin  could  be  traced.  They  began  to  extend 
the  term  to  customs  that  were  not  of  foreign  pro- 
venience. Everything  that  offended  their  con- 

1  Ex.  20 :24.  2  See  Chapter  XV. 


PERSISTENCE  OF  CONTRASTS  43 

science  was  branded  as  Canaanite,  whatever  its 
historical  origin.  The  whole  outlook  on  the  past 
was  affected  by  their  new  standards;  the  pro- 
phetic polemic  was  read  back  into  the  desert, 
and  the  settlement  of  Canaan  was  interpreted  as 
a  conflict  between  the  prophetic  ideals  of  the 
seventh  century  and  the  average  religion  of  their 
contemporaries.  For  example,  human  sacrifice, 
though  we  know  through  the  gruesome  evidence 
of  excavations  that  it  was  practised  by  the  pre- 
Israelitic  inhabitants  of  Canaan,  was  hardly  un- 
known to  the  nomadic  Hebrew;  but  when  the 
prophets  came  to  condemn  it  utterly,  it  was 
relegated  to  the  category  of  distinctly  Canaanite 
institutions.  The  same  is  true,  probably,  of  the 
asherah  and  pillar,  of  the  graven  images,  and,  no 
doubt,  of  many  other  customs  that  once  belonged 
to  the  worship  of  Jehovah.  They  are  now 
branded  as  the  heathen  rites  of  baals,  practised 
by  the  former  inhabitants  of  the  land.1  While 
other  prophets  complain  of  sacrifice  because  of 
the  insincerity  of  those  who  offer  it  without 
obeying  the  moral  requirements  of  God,  Jeremiah 
goes  so  far  as  to  repudiate  it  altogether.  In  spite 
of  the  tradition  carrying  the  cultus  back  to  the 
Mosaic  era,  he  declares  that  in  the  day  that 
Jehovah  had  brought  their  fathers  out  of  the  land 
of  Egypt  he  gave  no  commandment  about  burnt 
offerings,  or  sacrifices,  but  only  about  obedience.2 
1Deut.  12:2-4,  29-31;  18:9-14,  etc.  2  Jer.  7:21-23. 


44  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

Amid  all  the  details  which  we  have  given  to 
illustrate  the  process  which  we  have  tried  to  de- 
scribe, one  thing  should  stand  out  clearly.  The 
conflict  of  ideals  which  began  with  the  contact  of 
nomadism  with  civilization  did  not  end  with  the 
coalescence  of  the  two  races.  A  divergence  of 
standards  originating  perhaps  in  cultural  lines, 
but  soon  transferred  to  other  grounds,  continued 
from  that  time  on.  Israel  never  settled  down  to 
a  manner  of  life  that  was  universal  or  that  was 
accepted  without  question.  The  comparison  of 
standards  had  bred  a  critical  attitude,  a  moral 
judgment  of  national  ideals  and  institutions. 
The  prophets  are  a  distinct  witness  to  the  fluid 
state  of  life  and  thought.  Though  they  were  a 
minority,  and  though  they  appear  at  first  as  re- 
actionaries and  conservatives,  the  very  opponents 
of  change  and  progress,  they  soon  assumed  the 
opposite  position  as  the  leaders  of  change  and 
reformation,  the  pioneers  toward  a  higher  na- 
tional conscience.1  Through  them  material  con- 
servatism was  transformed  into  spiritual  advance, 
and  in  the  wholesome  medium  of  flux,  which  is 
indicated  by  their  constant  conflict  with  popular 
standards  and  with  the  prophets  that  opposed 
them,  the  ideals  of  Israel  were  preserved  from 
stagnation  or  premature  crystallization. 
1  Compare  Chapter  X. 


VI 

E  PLURIBUS   UNUM 

WHILE  our  present  subject  is  the  history  of  the 
political  ideas  of  Israel  and  not  its  political  his- 
tory, the  growth  of  political  unity  under  the 
monarchy  is  worthy  of  some  consideration  to  show 
the  effect  of  this  movement  on  later  Hebrew 
nationalism. 

One  of  the  legacies  of  Mosaic  tradition,  if  not 
of  Mosaic  history,  was  the  idea  of  national  co- 
operation. By  welding  together  in  a  common 
purpose  a  few  clans  Moses  created  a  unit.  But 
the  unity  achieved  under  Moses  was  only  a  tem- 
porary federation.  The  records  which  represent 
Joshua  as  a  generalissimo  commanding  the  united 
twelve  tribes  in  the  conquest  of  the  whole  land  of 
Canaan  are  contradicted  by  the  earlier  records  in 
which  each  tribe  made  headway  and  secured  a 
place  of  settlement  as  best  it  could.  And  when 
at  last  this  movement  was  completed  and  a 
modus  vivendi  existed  between  Hebrew  and  Ca- 
naanite,  the  old  tribal  divisions  were  only  in- 
creased by  the  sundering  effect  of  geographical 
barriers  and  distance  and  by  the  addition  of  new 
coalescent  groups  of  natives. 

The  stories  of  Judges  are  witness  to  the  lack 
of  national  unity.  Defense  as  well  as  conquest 

45 


46  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

was  the  duty  of  each  tribe  to  itself.  The  Song  of 
Deborah,  it  is  true,  praises  temporary  alliance  in 
the  wars  of  Jehovah  and  curses  the  slacker,  but  it 
is  significant  that  there  is  no  reference  in  this 
early  poem  to  the  southern  settlements.  Other 
early  poems  refer  to  the  several  tribes  and  their 
comparative  strength  and  leadership,  but  never 
to  their  co-operation  or  self-effacement  in  nation- 
ality. The  kingdom  of  Saul  is  usually  considered 
the  triumph  of  national  unity,  but  there  is  no 
evidence  that  it  ever  included  Judah.  Indeed, 
much  of  Israel  was  apparently  subject  to  Philis- 
tine rather  than  Benjamite  control.  Even  under 
David  it  was  possible  for  "a  base  fellow,  whose 
name  was  Sheba,"  to  dissolve  the  hard-won  unity 
of  Israel  by  the  cry,  "Every  man  to  his  tents,  0 
Israel"  (II  Sam.  20:1).  "The  call,"  says  Pro- 
fessor Smith,  "is  not  to  war,  nor  to  an  individual 
anarchy.  ...  It  is  the  voice  of  a  reaction 
against  the  monarchy  on  the  part  of  that  tribal 
autonomy  which  Israel  brought  with  them  from 
their  desert  days.  How  the  habit  and  the  music 
of  the  desert  still  lasts  in  Israel  I"1  We  have  else- 
where referred  to  this  disjunctive  element  in 
Hebrew  history. 

The  causes  that  led  to  national  unity  in  spite 

of  these  tendencies  are  obvious.     They  were  both 

internal  and  external.     Between  Hebrew  and  Ca- 

naanite,  and  between  tribe  and  tribe,  jealousies 

1  G.  A.  Smith,  Early  Poetry  of  Israel,  p.  94. 


E  PLURIBUS  UNUM  47 

and  feuds  prevented  the  stabilizing  of  life.  No 
arbiter  could  settle  disputes  or  punish  offenses  t 
when  more  than  one  group  was  concerned.  The 
appendix  to  Judges,  in  dealing  with  this  difficulty, 
repeatedly  notes  that:  "In  those  days  there  was 
no  king  in  Israel;  every  man  did  that  which  was 
right  in  his  own  eyes."  A  king  was  essential  for 
national  unity  against  internal  anarchy.  Even 
more  potent  in  the  same  direction  was  the  influ- 
ence of  foreign  attack.  The  Philistines,  racially 
distinct  from  all  the  other  peoples  of  Canaan, 
naturally  inspired  more  united  action,  and  we  are 
justified  in  believing  that  the  kingdoms  of  Saul 
and  David  were  created  by  this  military  neces- 
sity. It  is  a  notable  fact  that  in  the  more  modern 
age  of  national  development  unification  has  been 
often  due  to  foreign  attack,  and  common  inter- 
ests have  created  nations  against  external  dangers 
or  domination. 

But  it  is  important  to  observe  of  the  nascent 
Hebrew  nationalism  that  abstract  unity  was  not 
a  motive  of  much  influence.  Though,  without 
doubt,  the  king,  the  capital,  and  the  temple 
served  as  centres  of  united  allegiance  and  greatly 
promoted  the  strength  which  is  in  union,  the  rec- 
ords nowhere  allude  to  the  appeal  to  unity. 
There  is  nothing  in  the  story  of  the  formation  of 
the  kingdom  to  indicate  that  either  the  actors  or 
the  historians  felt  any  sentiment  toward  union 
as  an  end  in  itself.  As  Todd  has  said:  "A  practi- 


48  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

cal  desire  to  be  allowed  to  cultivate  the  arts  of 
peace,  rather  than  a  conscious  straining  to  realize 
the  ideal  unity  of  Israel,  was  the  motive  for  the 
foundation  of  the  monarchy."  1  So  with  the 
division  of  the  kingdom  after  Solomon.  There  is 
no  hint  in  the  Books  of  Kings  that  any  one  re- 
gretted the  existence  for  two  centuries  of  two 
independent  and  rival  Hebrew  kingdoms.  The 
secession  is  commended  by  the  prophet  Shemaiah 
as  of  God  (I  Kings  12:24),  and  it  is  difficult  to 
tell  which  king  really  should  be  called  the  suc- 
cessor of  Solomon.  Both  of  them  are  condemned, 
one  as  an  oppressor,  the  other  as  an  idolater,  but 
neither  of  them  as  a  usurper  or  divider;  and  none 
of  their  followers  is  judged  by  the  standards  of 
ideal  national  unity.  Nor  do  our  other  sources, 
the  prophets,  seem  to  lament  the  divided  house. 
With  Hosea  as  a  very  doubtful  exception,  there  is 
no  reference  in  written  prophecy  condemning  the 
northern  kingdom  as  illegal,  nor,  with  the  same 
doubtful  exception,  do  we  meet  with  any  desire 
for  reunion  until  a  century  after  the  fall  of  Sama- 
ria in  the  prophets  Jeremiah  and  Ezekiel.2 

Still  more  striking  is  the  absence  of  the  ideal  of 
unification  in  the  later  movement  toward  unity 

1  Politics  and  Religion  in  Ancient  Israel,  p.  67. 

2Ezek.  37:15jf.;  Jer.  3:18;  Hosea  1:11.  On  the  authen- 
ticity of  the  last  two  passages  and  of  other  references  in 
Hosea  to  Judah,  see  commentaries,  also  for  Hosea's  alleged 
opposition  to  the  non-Davidic  monarchs,  or  to  monarchy  in 
general  (cf.  p.  79). 


E  PLURIBUS  UNUM  49 

in  the  little  kingdom  of  Judah  under  Josiah.  We 
may  agree  with  Todd  that  this  was  in  effect  a 
synoecismus,  the  formation  of  the  loose  outlying 
villages  near  Jerusalem  into  the  more  compact 
city-state.  But  the  purpose  of  Deuteronomy  is 
religious  unity  and  uniformity,  and  political  mo- 
tives are  nowhere  expressed. 

Of  the  political  ideal  of  national  unity  we  shall 
have  to  say,  therefore,  that  it  was  conspicuous 
by  its  absence.  And  yet  the  experiences  that 
had  taught  national  unity  cannot  have  failed  to 
leave  some  impress  on  subsequent  ideals.  Per- 
haps it  was  the  experience  of  the  exile  that  first 
awakened  Israel  to  this  ambition.  They  were 
conscious  first  of  this  ideal  when  circumstances 
denied  it.  Besides,  they  had  long  been  schooled 
by  prophets  and  lawgivers  in  a  national  unity 
that  was  not  political,  but  religious  or  cultural. 
Chiefly  by  contrast  with  others  their  own  unity 
had  been  fostered,  and  as  the  unity  of  Israel  be- 
came conscious  this  cultural  unity  naturally  grew. 
The  ambition  of  exilic  Hebrews  was  not  limited 
to  some  future  reassembling  in  Palestine;  it  de- 
veloped into  strict  standards  of  present  uniform- 
ity. It  is  an  unfortunate  fact  of  history  that 
national  unity,  whether  political  or  cultural,  has 
usually  been  promoted  by  an  artificial  hostility  to 
everything  alien.  So,  at  least,  it  was  with  Juda- 
ism, which  achieved  self-conscious  cohesion  by 
fostering  an  intensive  and  exclusive  self-culture, 


50  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

and  by  sacrificing  all  more  generous  and  catholic 
impulses.  Every  effort  was  made  to  exclude  for- 
eign influences.  Intermarriage  was  forbidden, 
and  under  the  stricter  nationalists,  all  alien  speech, 
literature,  and  customs  were  taboo. 

The  exclusiveness  of  later  Judaism  is  one  of 
the  least  attractive  characteristics  of  its  national 
life,  but  it  must  be  remembered  that  it  is  merely 
the  exaggeration  of  a  common  and  still  prevalent 
emphasis  on  nationalism.  It  is  fostered  by  two 
of  the  most  insidious  national  faults:  national 
pride  on  the  one  hand,  and  the  implacable  hatred 
of  foreigners  on  the  other.  That  these  were  arti- 
ficially stimulated  in  Judaism  is  evident  from  the 
particularism  of  the  priestly  writers,  and  of  the 
books  of  Esther  and  Nehemiah,  and  from  the  pro- 
test against  it  in  Ruth  and  Jonah.  That  it  created 
a  principal  problem  in  the  latest  periods  of  Juda- 
ism, including  the  age  of  early  Christianity,  is 
further  attested  by  our  records,  as  well  as  the 
more  assuring  fact  that  the  higher  international 
view-point  was  never  forgotten  and  ultimately 
prevailed  in  Pauline  Christianity. 


VII 

NATIONAL  PROTOTYPES 

THE  chief  medium  of  patriotic  instruction  in 
modern  times  is  the  teaching  of  history.  To 
train  the  youth  of  a  nation  for  future  citizenship 
we  interpret  the  past  of  that  nation  to  express  our 
ideals.  Indeed,  it  is  a  notorious  fact  that  the 
science  of  history  has  often  been  perverted  from 
the  impartial  presentation  of  truth  to  meet  the 
requirements  of  national  partisanship.  Noted 
figures  of  the  past  have  been  idealized  to  suit 
modern  standards.  But  even  without  such  per- 
version the  growth  of  one's  own  nation,  its  tri- 
umph over  difficulties  in  the  way,  the  example  of 
the  loyal  men  and  patriots,  who  by  their  courage 
and  wisdom  served  their  country  well,  all  form 
an  effective  factor  toward  national  unity  and 
progress. 

In  the  ancient  world  this  was  as  true  as  to-day, 
and  though,  perhaps,  civic  instruction  was  not  so 
thorough  or  so  systematic  as  is  ours,  nevertheless 
the  boys  of  Greece  and  Rome  learned  at  an  early 
age  the  familiar  tales  of  their  national  heroes. 
The  Hebrews,  too,  were  wont  to  review  the  past 
achievements  of  their  race,  and  in  the  extensive 

51 


52  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

narratives  of  Hebrew  history  that  occupy  the 
whole  first  half  of  the  Old  Testament  we  see  the 
inevitable  written  prose  deposit1  of  the  poet's  cry: 

"Let  us  now  praise  famous  men, 
And  our  fathers  that  begat  us." 

Even  the  Book  of  Genesis,  although  it  represents 
confessedly  the  days  before  the  nation  was  born, 
combines  with  its  many  other  motives  a  distinct 
national  spirit.  In  this  respect  it  finds  many 
parallels  in  other  literatures.  Indeed,  it  often 
happens  that  the  most  characteristic  stories  of  a 
nation  are  taken  from  the  history  and  even  legends 
of  the  prenational  period.  Thus  Wilhelm  Tell 
has  become  the  patron  saint  of  all  modern  Swit- 
zerland; King  Arthur,  the  Celt,  is  immortalized 
by  the  Anglo-Saxon  race;  and  the  German  people 
honor  along  with  heroes  of  their  recent  history 
the  more  shadowy  figures  of  Teutonic  folk-lore 
and  tradition.  Even  in  so  recent  a  nation  as 
America  the  tales  of  pre-Revolutionary  explorers 
and  colonists  and  the  more  shadowy  legends  of 
Ojib ways  and  Delawares  are  cherished  as  part  of 
the  national  heritage.  Whatever,  then,  be  the 
origin  of  the  patriarch  stories — and  the  question 
is  one  of  great  delicacy  and  complexity — it  can 

1  There  are,  of  course,  some  poems  and  poetic  fragments 
remaining  in  the  Octateuch,  e.  g.,  in  Genesis,  chapter  49,  for 
which  see  p.  33.  Probably  much  now  in  prose  was  once  in 
poetry.  And  in  Judges  4  and  5  it  is  possible  to  compare  a 
prose  and  a  poetical  version  of  the  same  story. 


NATIONAL  PROTOTYPES  53 

surely  be  said  that  they  were  so  thoroughly  appro- 
priated and  adopted  by  the  Hebrew  nation  that 
both  through  many  generations  of  oral  transmis- 
sion and  after  they  received  their  present  form, 
these  stories  served  the  Hebrew  people  as  an 
inspiring  national  epic. 

The  miscellaneous  character  of  the  Book  of 
Genesis  is  evident  to  every  careful  reader — even 
to  those  who  are  unfamiliar  with  the  distinct  lin- 
guistic differences  in  the  original  that  seem  to 
indicate  the  participation  of  at  least  three  differ- 
ent writers.  There  is,  for  example,  the  difference 
of  subject-matter  that  clearly  divides  the  book  in 
two  after  the  eleventh  chapter:  up  to  that  point 
its  stories  are  cosmic  and  general,  after  that  point 
they  contain  a  cycle  of  narratives  associated  with 
the  patriarchs  Abraham,  Isaac,  Jacob,  and  Joseph. 
Even  within  this  cycle  each  story  is  complete  in 
itself;  each  has  its  own  particular  purpose  and 
view-point.  Doubtless  these  stories  came  from 
many  different  sources  and  each  had  a  long  and 
independent  history.  In  some  cases  the  origin  of 
the  stories  is  known  or  can  be  conjectured  with 
some  probability.  The  stories  of  the  creation 
and  the  flood  may  have  been  derived  from  the 
Babylonian  versions  that  we  possess  or  from  a 
more  ancient  Semitic  original.  The  story  of 
Babel  would  naturally  arise  from  the  place  it 
describes;  perhaps  the  allusions  to  local  shrines  in 
the  patriarch  stories  indicate  a  Canaanite  origin; 


54  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

while  the  local  color  and  literary  echoes  of  the 
Joseph  stories  suggest  Egyptian  provenience. 

Very  miscellaneous,  too,  are  the  purposes  of 
the  stories:  the  motives  are  varied  and  often 
mixed.  Many  are  setiological — intended  to  ex- 
plain the  origin  of  words,  of  customs,  of  charac- 
ters, of  races,  and  of  the  world.  Others  are  told 
to  exalt  certain  qualities,  to  make  comparisons. 
In  many  cases  the  story  can  be  justified  simply 
for  its  own  sake — as  can  an  entertaining  tale  well 
told. 

To  such  a  varied  book — a  book,  moreover,  that 
is  not  a  separate  unit  but  merely  the  first  volume 
of  a  continuous  work — one  can  scarcely  look  for 
a  simple  distinctive  political  ideal.  It  may  be 
misleading  even  to  speak  in  the  plural  of  the 
national  ideals  of  Genesis  when  its  materials  are 
so  diverse  in  origin  and  character.  Nevertheless 
Genesis  does  illustrate  as  well,  perhaps,  as  more 
homogeneous  volumes  of  the  Octateuch,  the  He- 
brews* use  of  stories  in  inculcating  patriotic  spirit 
and  in  idealizing  national  standards.  Besides,  as 
it  has  come  to  us,  much  of  the  material  has  been 
welded  into  a  partial  unity  and  already  fitted  to 
the  Hebrew  norms.  This  is  particularly  evident 
in  the  religious  adjustment  of  the  heathen  stories 
to  the  monotheistic  view-point  of  the  prophets 
and  priests  of  the  later  days.1  And  if  we  are 

1 E.  g.,  the  fourth  chapter  of  Genesis  carries  the  worship  of 
Jehovah  back  to  the  sons  or  grandsons  of  Adam. 


NATIONAL  PROTOTYPES  55 

right  in  giving  a  foreign  origin  to  any  of  its  stories, 
these,  too,  are  overlaid  with  a  genuine  Hebrew 
coloring,  while  the  surviving  archaic  elements  in 
Genesis  represent  with  unsurpassed  fidelity  much 
of  that  ancient  local  inheritance  that  can  be  re- 
called in  more  historic  ages  only  through  the  folk- 
tales of  the  older  children  of  the  soil.  Like  the 
Morte  cT  Arthur  of  Malory,  the  Book  of  Genesis 
represents  fairly  well  the  real  ideals  of  the  nation, 
combining  the  new  religious  and  political  ideals 
of  the  invaders  with  the  native  standards  so  long 
current  in  local  song  and  story.  Thus,  perhaps 
more  fully  in  this  book  than  in  any  other,  are 
reflected  the  resultant  ideals  of  the  Hebrew- 
Canaanite  fusion. 

Even  the  first  chapters  of  Genesis ,  although,  as 
has  been  said,  their  scope  is  general,  reveal  some- 
thing of  the  international  outlook  of  the  Hebrew 
mind.  The  unity  of  all  mankind  is  represented 
through  common  descent  not  only  from  Adam 
but  also  from  Noah.  Racial  differences  are,  of 
course,  noted,  and  differences  of  language,1  but 
behind  all  smaller  units  the  fundamental  brother- 
hood of  man  is  certainly  suggested.  The  genea- 
logical tables2  are  a  most  explicit  presentation  of 
the  racial  and  tribal  subdivisions.  Their  scope 
— from  Spain  to  India — shows  the  geographical 
horizon  of  their  authors'  day  and  the  relation  be- 
lieved to  exist  between  the  Hebrew  nation  and 

1  Gen.  11:1-^9.  2  Gen.  10. 


. 


56  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

the  other  nations  of  the  world.  Throughout 
these  lists  and  elsewhere  each  nation  is  spoken  of 
as  an  individual  according  to  the  common  as- 
sumption that  each  tribe  was  descended  from  a 
single  ancestor  and  bore  his  name.  And  the  rela- 
tionship of  the  family  chart  represents  the  author's 
sense  of  racial  affiliation.  When,  for  example, 
Egypt  (Mizraim)  and  Canaan  are  called  the  sons 
of  Ham,  and  it  is  added  that  Canaan  begat  Sidon 
and  the  other  Canaanite  peoples,1  it  is  plain  that 
one  should  think  more  of  geographical  and  na- 
tional relations  than  of  individuals.  It  is  well 
known  that  the  modern  ethnological  terms,  Se- 
mitic and  Hamitic,  are  due  to  these  "maps"  of 
the  Hebrew  genealogist. 

The  theory  of  tribal  common  descent,  still 
maintained  in  the  tribes  of  Arabia,  explains  the 
meaning  of  the  patriarchs'  relationships.  Most 
emphatic  is  the  assumption  of  such  a  people  as 
the  Hebrews  that  their  national  unity  is  a  genuine 
physical  brotherhood — a  descent  from  a  common 
ancestor.  Their  very  names  are  patronymic — 
"Hebrews,"  from  the  eponymous  Eber,2  or  "chil- 
dren of  Israel"  from  the  less  shadowy  Israel  or 
Jacob.  So  the  "children  of  Ammon"  is  an  his- 
torical name  that  necessitates  a  prehistoric  ances- 
tor Ammon,  as  in  Greece  Dorians  and  ^Eolians 
were  felt  to  presuppose  ancestors  named  Dorus 
and  ^Eolus.  In  some  cases  the  race  and  the  hero 

*  Gen.  10:6,  15-18.  JGen.  10:21. 


NATIONAL  PROTOTYPES  57 

have  identical  names,  as  Edom  and  Moab.  As 
the  earlier  charts  give  the  Hebrew  relations  to 
more  remote  and  alien  peoples,  so  the  patriarchal 
stories  supply  their  supposed  kinship  to  these 
nearer  neighbors  and  even  the  unity  and  sub- 
divisions existing  among  their  own  tribes.  With- 
out reproducing  the  whole  family  tree  it  will  be 
sufficient  to  recall  as  illustrations  that  Edom 
(Esau)  was  a"  brother,  though  a  rival,  of  Israel 
(Jacob),  that  the  brothers  Moab  and  Ammon 
were  only  cousins  of  Israel,  while  among  the 
twelve  sons  of  Jacob  certain  groupings  exist,  due 
to  their  different  mothers.  Thus  Joseph  and 
Benjamin  are  associated  as  full  brothers  (sons  of 
Rachel),  while  in  the  next  generation  Ephraim 
and  Manasseh  are  similarly  connected,  as  grand- 
sons through  Joseph. 

It  is  often  difficult  to  tell  whether  actual  his- 
tory is  really  intended,  and  where  the  individual 
hero  shades  off  into  a  nation.  But  even  at  their 
face  value  the  stories  contain  a  meaning  far 
deeper  than  any  mere  myth  or  folk-tale.  The 
characters  are  national  types.  The  interest  of 
the  narrator  is  in  the  present,  not  the  past.  His 
questions  are  manifold.  He  wishes  to  know,  be- 
sides the  relations  of  the  tribes,  the  reasons  for 
their  respective  traits  and  locations,  for  their 
ownership  of  certain  places.  "And  with  special 
frequency  was  it  asked,  How  does  Israel  come  to 
have  this  glorious  land  of  Canaan?"1 

1  Gunkel,  The  Legends  of  Genesis,  p.  26. 


58  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

More  important  than  the  questions  of  relation- 
ship are  the  suggestions  of  national  character 
which  are  undoubtedly  embodied  in  the  personal 
portraits.  The  patriarchs  are  national  types. 
Without  accepting  the  term  "legend,"  which 
Gunkel  applies  to  these  stories,  one  can  fully  agree 
with  him  when  he  says: 

In  these  legends  the  clearest  matter  is  the  character 
of  the  races :  here  is  Esau,  the  huntsman  of  the  steppes, 
living  with  little  reflection  from  hand  to  mouth,  for- 
getful, magnanimous,  brave,  and  hairy  as  a  goat;  and 
there  is  Jacob  the  herdsman,  a  smooth  man,  more  cun- 
ning and  accustomed  to  look  into  the  future.  His 
uncle  Laban  is  the  type  of  the  Aramaean,  avaricious 
and  deceitful,  but  to  outward  appearances  an  excellent 
and  upright  man,  never  at  loss  for  an  excuse.  A  more 
noble  figure  is  Abraham,  hospitable,  peaceful,  a  model 
of  piety.1 

Thus  through  the  simplest  stories,  told  quite 
objectively,  the  ideals  of  the  Hebrews  find  ex- 
pression. Both  the  nomadic  and  the  agricultural 
ideals  emerge  even  in  the  earliest  chapters.  The 
developments  of  the  arts  of  civilization  are  looked 
on  askance,  on  the  one  hand,  with  a  nomad's 
dread  of  innovation;  they  lead,  we  may  infer,  to 
the  rejection  of  Cain's  offering  and  to  the  more 
violent  punishment  of  the  contemporaries  of  Noah 
and  the  builders  at  Babel.  On  the  other  hand, 
paradise  is  represented  as  a  fertile  garden,  and 
1  The  Legends  of  Genesis,  pp.  22,  23. 


NATIONAL  PROTOTYPES  59 

the  discovery  of  the  grape  and  its  rest-giving  juice 
is  hailed  with  joy.  Moral  judgments  are  ex- 
pressed not  only  against  the  licentious  crimes  of 
foreigners  or  aliens  like  Canaan  and  Shechem,  but 
even  against  the  vengeful  or  jealous  acts  of  the 
real  children  of  Israel.1 

But  most  undisguised  is  the  patriotic  tenor  of 
the  book.  Much  as  the  origins  of  the  world  and 
of  other  peoples  roused  their  curiosity,  the  chief 
concern  of  the  Hebrews  was  the  genesis  of  their 
own  race.  Back  they  must  push  their  inquiry 
beyond  the  dawn  of  clear  history  into  a  past  that 
will  explain  their  greatness  and  the  glory  of  their 
land.  Like  all  literature  of  its  kind,  Genesis  is 
warm  with  patriotic  emotion.  How  far  its  stories 
represent  actual  persons  and  events  we  need  not 
here  discuss.  They  are,  at  any  rate,  a  reflection 
of  the  Hebrew  national  ideals.  In  the  stories  of 
patriarchal  migrations  is  reflected  the  sense  of 
alien  origin  outside  the  land  of  Canaan.  In  the 
stories  of  God's  repeated  promises  is  shown  the 
consciousness  of  hard-won  ownership  and  of  pros- 
perity achieved.  Like  Jacob  at  Penuel,  Israel 
had  wrestled  with  God  and  had  won  his  blessing. 
In  the  stories  of  the  humiliation  or  the  outwitting 
of  Lot,  of  Laban,  and  of  Esau,  we  see  the  Hebrews 
triumphant  over  their  kinsmen  of  the  south  and 
east.  And  through  the  repeated  vicissitudes,  se- 
lections, and  providences  of  the  whole  cycle  of 
i  Gen.  34  and  37. 


60  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

patriarchal  story  there  runs  like  a  red  cord  the 
firm  conviction  of  a  special  national  election  and 
destiny. 

In  summary  we  may  say  that  in  a  sporadic  and 
unorganized  manner,  but  yet  in  a  most  effective 
way,  the  stories  of  Genesis  expressed  the  temper 
of  the  Hebrew  nation.  The  virtues  and  the 
faults  of  its  character  were  personified  in  one  or 
another  of  those  prototypes  from  whom  it  claimed 
descent.  In  their  experiences  were  embodied  the 
experiences  of  the  race — of  wandering  and  of  rest, 
of  prosperity  and  disaster,  of  reliance  on  God  and 
the  assurances  of  his  promises.  The  actual  unity 
and  solidarity  of  the  nation  both  established  the 
belief  in  a  common  descent  and  was  established 
by  that  belief.  Identity  and  continuity  of  na- 
tional life  were  pictured  by  the  simple  thread  of 
personal  genealogy,  while  the  antipathies  and  hos- 
tilities, the  jealousies  and  moral  scorn  of  sister 
peoples  secured  corresponding  expression.  Yet 
with  all  the  national  prejudices  and  limitations  a 
wide  horizon  of  interest  and  a  generous  sense  of 
human  brotherhood  existed  and  a  courageous 
trust  in  the  providence  of  the  Creator,  and  in  the 
justice  of  the  Father  of  all  mankind. 


VIII 

WAR 

A  NATION'S  ideals  are  often  best  revealed  by 
war.  War  is  a  great  national  effort,  and  the 
aims  of  war  indicate  the  common  national  goal. 
With  the  Hebrews,  as  in  modern  times,  the  aims 
of  war  were  manifold  and  often  mixed.  They 
did  not  distinguish  wars  as  aggressive  and  defen- 
sive, nor  divide  economic,  political,  and  ideal 
motives.  They  fought  for  booty,  territory,  trib- 
ute, domination,  prestige;  to  avenge  wrongs,  to 
defend  rights.  They  fought  to  maintain  or  secure 
independence,  to  prevent  invasion  or  even  to  gain 
commercial  opportunities.  Spheres  of  influence, 
strategic  frontiers,  unredeemed  territory,  national 
honor,  were  ideas  known  to  them  in  fact  if  not  in 
name.  The  Hebrews  even  fought  to  gain  peace 
and  security.  And  all  these  war  aims  can  be 
called  national  ideals. 

But  war  itself  was  not  to  them  a  national  ideal. 
Rarely,  if  ever,  has  war  been  an  end  in  itself  to 
any  nation.  Certainly  the  Hebrews  knew  the 
risks  and  the  horrors  of  war.  They  loved  peace; 
but  victory,  too,  was  sweet,  and  the  fruits  of  vic- 
tory were  to  be  had  only  by  war.  War  was  only 
a  means  to  these  ends,  a  method  of  realizing  na- 

61 


62  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

tional  ambitions.  But  the  method  of  war  is  so 
closely  associated  with  its  ends,  so  easily  confused 
with  national  hopes,  so  prominent  as  the  expres- 
sion of  national  life,  that  the  institution  of  war 
must  be  included  in  any  study  of  a  nation's  ideals. 
The  importance  of  war  in  Hebrew  history  is 
manifest  from  our  records,  especially  those  which 
are  oldest  and  which  are  least  edited  and  altered 
in  the  interests  of  religion.  The  Song  of  Deborah, 
probably  the  oldest  extant  piece  of  Hebrew  com- 
position, is  a  war  poem.  The  ancient  lost  collec- 
tion of  folk-songs  bore  the  significant  title,  The 
Book  of  the  Wars  of  Jehovah.  In  those  unvar- 
nished tales  of  the  early  monarchy  that  make  up 
our  Books  of  Samuel  the  wars  of  Israel  are  the 
predominant  interest  of  the  author,  who  was 
nearly  contemporary;  while  in  the  earliest  strands 
of  the  records  of  the  premonarchic  period  military 
history  has  a  pre-eminent  place.  As  military 
necessity  was  the  constant  creator  of  national 
unity,  national  loyalty  is  expressed  chiefly  by 
military  service.  Patriotism  is  nearly  synony- 
mous with  the  virtues  of  war — obedience,  strategy, 
and  courage.  The  Song  of  Deborah,  as  it  calls 
curses  upon  the  slackers  of  Meroz,  calls  blessings 
upon  the  leaders  that  took  the  lead  in  Israel,  on 
the  people  that  offered  themselves  willingly,  and 
even  upon  the  crafty  woman  who  murdered  the 
enemy  general  in  her  tent.  The  coefficient  of 
popularity  was  military  success: 


WAR  63 

"  Saul  hath  slain  his  thousands, 
And  David  his  ten  thousands." 

And  the  prowess  of  David  was  never  forgotten. 
The  association  of  war  and  patriotism  is  too  fre- 
quent in  the  Old  Testament  and  too  familiar  in 
modern  times  to  need  further  illustration. 

But  a  third  element'  should  be  mentioned  which 
entered  this  association  of  war  and  nationalism 
on  almost  equal  terms  and,  as  it  wele,  created  a 
triangle.  This  was  religion.  The  state,  the 
church,  and  the  army  were  never  more  clearly 
identical  than  in  the  primitive  culture  of  the  He- 
brews and  the  other  Semites.  We  have  mentioned 
before  the  relation  of  religion  and  nationality,  we 
have  just  declared  the  connection  of  patriotism 
and  war;  it  remains  to  say  a  word  of  the  connec- 
tion of  war  and  religion.  As  religion  is  national 
and  as  nationality  is  expressed  chiefly  in  war,  it 
is  obvious  that  religion,  except  as  a  personal  or 
family  affair,  also  appears  as  military.  War  is  a 
religious  institution.  It  is  undertaken  at  the  be- 
hest of  a  national  god,  carried  on  under  his  direc- 
tion, and  concluded  according  to  his  will.  To 
him  belongs  the  glory  and  to  him  is  given  the 
bulk  of  the  spoils.  The  king,  the  soldiers,  and 
the  weapons  are  anointed  with  holy  oil.  God  is 
in  the  armed  camp  and  on  the  battle-field,  either 
in  the  shape  of  images  or  of  a  holy  chest,  like  the 
ark  of  Jehovah  of  armies,  or  in  less  definite  form. 
His  presence  and  help  are  often  manifested  by 


64  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

cloud,  rain,  hail,  flood,  earthquake.  By  his  will 
"the  stars  in  their  courses  fought  against  Sisera," 
and  the  sun  and  moon  stood  still  to  lengthen 
Joshua' s  victory. 

That  this  religious  interpretation  of  war  is  not 
due  to  the  unique  genius  for  religion  of  the  He- 
brew people  is  proved  by  parallels  in  all  other 
national  religions.  The  Moabites,  to  take  one 
neighbor  as  an  example,  evidently  shared  the  same 
view.  King  Mesha  warred  at  the  command  of 
Chemosh,  as  Joshua  warred  at  the  command  of 
Jehovah,  and  by  established  custom,  each  victor 
dedicated  to  his  god  and  ally  the  spoil.  The  same 
Mesha,  to  escape  the  straits  of  siege,  slew  his  son 
on  the  city  walls,  a  sacrifice  to  Chemosh,  much  as 
Jephthah  sacrificed  his  daughter  as  a  burnt  offer- 
ing to  Jehovah.  As  an  Israelite  expressed  the 
likeness  in  a  diplomatic  dialogue,  "  Wilt  not  thou 
possess  that  which  Chemosh  thy  god  giveth  thee 
to  possess?  So  whomsoever  Jehovah  our  God 
hath  dispossessed  from  before  us  them  will  we 
possess."  1 

This  religious  interpretation  of  war  was  not 
entirely  abandoned  even  by  the  prophets.  On 
the  contrary,  the  earliest  prophets  seem  to  have 
been,  like  the  Zealots  of  the  later  era,  the  instiga- 
tors of  war,  both  civil  and  foreign.  Under  the 

1  See  Mesha's  own  inscription  on  the  Moabite  Stone,  and 
II  Kings  3:27;  Judges  11.  Compare  the  story  of  Mesha's 
contemporary,  Hiel  the  Bethelite,  in  I  Kings  16:34. 


WAR  65 

kings  of  Israel  the  prophetic  institution,  with  the 
priesthood,  often  became,  like  the  Delphic  oracle 
in  Greece  or  the  modern  churches,  entirely  sub- 
servient to  the  political  authorities.  They  were 
mobilized  in  time  of  war  so  as  to  be  of  great  service 
in  maintaining  national  morale.  Independents 
like  Micaiah,  who  refused  to  be  a  mere  rubber 
stamp  for  the  wilful  Ahab;  Isaiah,  who  opposed 
the  statecraft  of  Hezekiah;  and  Jeremiah,  the 
antiwar  agitator  of  Judah's  last  days,  though 
they  were  opposed  by  the  religious  officials  of 
their  day  as  bitterly  as  by  political  jingoes,  were 
pioneers  in  a  somewhat  changed  interpretation  of 
war.  Even  for  the  writing  prophets,  however, 
victory  still  is  the  gift  of  God,  and  defeat  his  pun- 
ishment. But  his  requirements  are  now  ethical 
rather  than  ritual,  and  military  success  is  closely 
related  to  personal  and  social  justice.  The  proph- 
ets' internationalism  in  religion  also  affected  their 
explanation  of  war.  Jehovah  was  no  longer  bound 
to  help  his  own  people — right  or  wrong.  Even 
Israel's  enemies  could  be  rewarded  by  him  with 
victory,  or  used  as  the  rod  of  his  anger  against 
Israel.  Of  course,  to  the  monotheist  Jehovah  is 
the  supreme  controller  of  history;  no  other  gods 
need  be  considered.  He  becomes  then  less  of  "a 
man  of  war,"  and  though  the  term  "Lord  of 
Hosts"  is  retained  of  him,  his  military  functions 
become  less  anthropomorphic,  less  partisan,  and 
altogether  less  prominent  in  the  religious  thought 


66  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

of  Judaism.  Nevertheless  the  older  view  never 
disappeared,  and  even  modern  Christianity  at 
war  has  not  emancipated  an  international  Provi- 
dence from  some  of  the  partisanship  and  other 
debasing  attributes  of  a  national  god. 

Though  there  is  much  that  is  quaint  in  the  Old 
Testament  attitude  to  war  we  have  already  seen 
that  it  contains  much  that  is  modern.  The  com- 
mon saying  that  war  is  an  anachronism  only 
means  that  the  man  of  to-day  differs  from  his 
forebears  less  in  this  matter  than  in  many  others. 
Time  has  changed  the  implements  of  war,  its 
scale,  and  perhaps  its  purpose,  but  not  the  emo- 
tional and  irrational  attitude  of  those  who  engage 
upon  it.  Concerning  the  necessity,  the  efficiency, 
and  the  morality  of  war,  the  early  Hebrew  exer- 
cised as  much  or  as  little  intelligent  judgment  as 
the  average  twentieth-century  Christian.  It  is 
easy,  therefore,  for  us  to  picture  the  ancient  atti- 
tude. 

Like  much  of  modern  society,  the  ancient  He- 
brew looked  upon  war  as  a  necessary  evil.  It 
was  a  bane,  a  "sore  judgment,"  like  plague  or 
famine,  and  it  was  equally  unavoidable.  Modern 
man  has  only  just  discovered  that  pestilence  and 
famine  can  be  met  and  mitigated  by  human 
organization.  He  has  still  more  recently  con- 
ceived the  idea  of  applying  similar  effort  to  the 
eradication  of  war.  But  the  ancient  Hebrew  was 
equally  innocent  of  human  hope  for  any  of  these 


WAR  67 

ills.  The  origin  of  war  seemed  no  more  artificial 
than  the  causes  of  rain  and  earthquake;  all  three 
were  assigned  to  supernatural  causes.  Jehovah 
brought  war  and  defeat  upon  his  people  as  a 
punishment,  and  he  alone  also  gave  peace.  When 
Jehovah  came  to  be  conceived  as  an  international 
God  he  did  the  same  for  other  peoples.  The 
doom  which  the  prophets  as  his  spokesmen  threat- 
ened for  their  own  nation  and  for  other  nations 
was  chiefly  in  military  terms,  while  among  the 
blessings  offered  for  the  future  none  was  more 
attractive  than  peace.  But  as  the  way  to  inter- 
national peace  only  two  paths  occurred  to  them: 
a  world  empire  based  on  conquest,  and  the  in- 
tervention of  God.  Either  the  mailed  fist  and 
pan-Hebraism,  or  else  such  a  divine  miracle  as 
should  include  within  its  scope  the  taming  of  mar- 
tial men  and  the  transformation  of  the  lion  and 
the  adder — these  two  seemed  the  only  sure  cura- 
tives for  war.  So  fully  did  the  ancient  Hebrew 
accept  as  a  human  necessity  the  will  to  fight. 

In  like  manner  the  efficiency  of  war  does  not 
seem  to  have  been  questioned  more  in  antiquity 
than  in  modern  times.  Pacific  diplomacy  was 
not  entirely  unknown  to  the  Hebrews,  the  favo- 
rite form  being  alliance  cemented  by  royal  mar- 
riage. Such  alliances  were,  however,  rarely  a 
substitute  for  war  or  a  preventive  of  war.  They 
often  proved  within  one  generation  a  chief  cause 
of  war,  both  domestic  and  foreign.  An  interest- 


68  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

ing  alternative  to  war  is  the  request  of  Moses  for 
permission  to  pass  through  a  neighbor's  lands 
under  mutual  guarantees.  But  this,  too,  proved 
rather  an  ultimatum  of  war  than  a  substitute  for 
it.  For  when  the  request  was  refused,  either 
another  route  was  sought,  or  the  Israelite  army 
hewed  its  way  through  against  resistance.1  No 
case  of  arbitration,  as  a  preventive  of  war,  ap- 
pears in  the  history  of  the  Hebrews.  Of  course 
then,  as  to-day,  wars  were  followed  by  terms  of 
peace.  But  the  absence  of  any  recognized  alter- 
native to  war  was  a  chief  reason  that  the  institu- 
tion's efficiency  was  unchallenged.  It  had  already 
the  fatality  which  long  traditions  had  given  it. 
Even  in  the  free,  democratic  life  of  early  Semitic 
civilization  its  practical  justification  was  unques- 
tioned, and  certainly  with  the  growth  of  autoc- 
racy in  Israel  the  citizens  could  scarcely  expect  to 
do  other  than  give  implicit  obedience  to  the  king's 
commands; 

"  Theirs  not  to  reason  why, 
Theirs  but  to  do  and  die." 

Unwillingness  to  fight  seems  to  have  been  due 
sometimes  to  personal  feelings,  rarely  to  logic. 
Gideon  was  able  to  reduce  his  volunteer  army  to 
a  third  of  its  size  by  dismissing  every  one  who 
was  " fearful  and  trembling."2  And  according  to 

iNum.  20:14-21;  21:21-31. 
3  Judges  7:3;  cf.  Deut.  20:8. 


WAR  69 

the  early,  though  naturally  partisan,  Song  of 
Deborah,  indifference  and  selfish  ease  had  kept 
other  tribes  from  joining  the  great  victory  that 
the  tribes  of  central  Palestine  secured  over  Sisera. 

"At  the  watercourses  of  Reuben 
There  were  great  searchings  of  heart. 
Why  sattest  thou  among  the  sheepfolds, 
To  hear  the  pipings  for  the  flocks? 
Gilead  abode  beyond  the  Jordan: 
And  Dan,  why  did  he  remain  in  ships? 
Asher  sat  still  at  the  haven  of  the  sea, 
And  abode  by  his  creeks."    (Judges  5:15-17.) 

But  the  effectiveness  of  war  as  a  means  to  an 
end  was  never  questioned.  Of  course  victory 
was  never  sure,  but  when  a  crisis  came  no  other 
alternative  suggested  itself  except  the  hazard  at 
arms,  and  war  became  not  a  last  resort,  but  imme- 
diately inevitable. 

Neither  does  the  moral  justification  of  war 
appear  as  a  problem  in  the  Old  Testament,  at 
least  not  for  Israel.  It  is  true  that  the  prophets 
were  critical  of  ruthless  warfare  carried  on  by 
foreign  nations,1  and  particularly  of  the  predatory 
militarism  of  the  great  empires  that  successively 
held  Israel  under  their  hateful  yoke;  but  this  con- 
demnation was  scarcely  based  on  impartial  moral 
standards.  The  very  prophets  who  were  most 
zealous  for  the  Lord  of  Hosts  were  most  free  to 
encourage  and  even  to  execute  ruthless  warfare. 
2  Amos  1,  2.  (See  Chapter  XI.) 


70  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

The  Israelites  appear  as  ready  to  exterminate  the 
foe  and  to  repay  injuries  as  any  of  their  neighbors. 
Illustrations  are  not  necessary,  though  it  must  be 
remembered  that  some  of  the  most  vigorous  nar- 
ratives are  probably  exaggerations  due  to  the 
patriotic  idealization  of  past  victories  and  the 
fanatic  zeal  of  prophetic  or  priestly  historians. 
The  extermination  of  the  Canaanites,  for  example, 
which  shocks  Christian  sentiment,  probably  ex- 
isted only  on  paper.  There  are  other  and  older 
historical  passages  which  plainly  deny  it.  Indeed, 
according  to  one  source,  Jehovah  left  Canaanites 
in  the  land  for  the  specific  purpose  of  giving  later 
generations  adequate  military  training,  "to  prove 
Israel  by  them,  even  as  many  of  Israel  as  had  not 
known  all  the  wars  of  Canaan."  1  Even  could  we 
believe  with  the  Syrians  that  "the  kings  of  the 
house  of  Israel  are  merciful  kings/'  it  is  evident 
that  the  prophets  of  Israel  were  not  merciful 
prophets.  In  two  instances  a  king  is  rebuked 
by  a  prophet  for  sparing  his  enemy.2  Deuteron- 
omy repeatedly  warns  against  the  natural  ten- 
dency to  leniency  in  dealing  with  a  beaten  foe. 
In  the  case  of  Canaanite  cities  not  even  women 
and  children  are  to  be  spared.  The  same  writer's 
injunction  to  spare  fruit-trees  is  prompted  not  by 
a  primitive  sense  of  international  law,  but  by 
selfish  reasons,  and  by  the  author's  characteris- 
tic consideration  for  inanimate  objects:  "For  is 
i  Judges  3:1.  *  I  Sam.  15;  I  Kings  20 :31  Jf . 


WAR  71 

the  tree  of  the  field  man,  that  it  should  be  be- 
sieged of  thee  ? "  l  But  even  were  minor  refine- 
ments of  the  conduct  of  war  to  be  found  in  the 
Old  Testament,  they  would  not  answer  the  chief 
question,  Is  war  as  a  whole  justified?  As  has 
been  said:  "The  question  of  the  right  or  wrong 
of  war  in  general  was  never  raised  among  the 
Hebrews,  so  far  as  we  can  judge  from  the  Old 
Testament,  and  our  sources  never  suggest  that 
they  had  any  doubt  regarding  the  righteousness 
of  the  wars  which  they  waged,  either  in  the  con- 
quest or  for  the  defense  of  the  land  of  Canaan. 
Just  as  they  assumed  that  Jehovah  was  righteous, 
so  they  had  no  other  thought  than  that  the  wars 
of  Jehovah's  people  against  other  nations  were 
just  and  necessary.  They  had  the  easy  and  com- 
fortable faith  that  their  foes  were  Jehovah's  foes, 
and,  therefore,  they  believed  that  to  fight  those 
foes  was  a  very  essential  element  of  loyalty  to 
Jehovah." 2  Absorbed  with  confidence  in  the 
holy  and  patriotic  ends  for  which  they  fought, 
unconsciously  they  assumed  that  the  ends  justi- 
fied the  means.  In  this  respect,  also,  they  reflect 
the  modern  mind. 

.The  single  moral  or  religious  objection  to  war 
found  in  the  Bible  only  makes  this  gen eral  state- 
ment more  clear.  The  writing  prophets  do  seem, 
as  we  have  said,  to  oppose  the  military  policy  of 

1Deut.  20:19. 

2  Gilbert,  The  Bible  and  Universal  Peace,  p.  42. 


72  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

some  of  their  contemporaries;  but  their  motive  is 
neither  respect  for  taboos  and  priestly  procedure, 
as  at  some  earlier  times,  nor  a  moral  condemna- 
tion for  the  whole  institution,  like  that  of  the 
modern  pacifist.  Their  opposition  to  war  is  due 
to  their  sense  of  trust  in  God.  This  appears  par- 
ticularly in  Isaiah  and  Jeremiah,  but  it  is  not 
confined  to  them.  In  the  Book  of  Micah,  for 
example,  the  fortress  of  Lachish  on  the  Egyptian 
border,  with  its  chariots  and  horses,  is  said  to 
have  been  the  beginning  of  sin  to  the  daughter  of 
Zion;1  when  God  purifies  the  land  of  idols  he  will 
destroy  the  munitions  of  war  as  well — fortresses, 
chariots,  and  horses.2  Hosea,  too,  combines  for- 
eign alliances  and  trust  in  cavalry  with  idolatry. 
Ephraim,  like  a  silly  dove,  turns  for  help  to 
Egypt  or  to  Assyria,  but  they  return  not  to  him 
that  is  on  high;3  therefore,  the  prophet  calls  them 
to  the  renunciation  of  both  with  true  repentance. 
They  are  to  say: 

"Assyria  shall  not  save  us; 

We  will  not  ride  upon  horses  [i.  e.,  Egypt  shall  not 

save  us]; 
Neither  will  we  say  any  more  to  the  work  of  our 

hands,  Ye  are  our  gods; 
For  in  thee  the  fatherless  findeth  mercy." 4 

The  prophets  objected  to  resort  to  war,  be- 
cause it  showed  a  lack  of  faith  that  became  in- 

1  Micah  1 : 13.  «  Micah  5 : 10-14. 

3  Hosea  7:11,  16.  4  Hosea  14:3. 


WAR  73 

fidelity,  a  neglect  of  God  comparable  to  adultery 
in  private  life  or  to  apostasy  in  religion.  As  one 
commentator  says:  "The  defiant  display  of  human 
strength  which  renders  divine  help  unnecessary  is 
particularly  obnoxious  to  them." 1  By  Isaiah 
especially  these  dangers  of  militarism  were  clearly 
discovered.  It  is  a  striking  fact  that  God  is  first 
called  spirit  in  contrast  with  the  material  pre- 
paredness for  war  and  military  alliance  (Isaiah 
31:3).  Though  the  prophets,  therefore,  cannot 
be  called  absolute  non-resistants  or  pacifists,  their 
clear  apprehension  of  the  materialism  of  war- 
makers  and  their  firm  reliance  on  the  spiritual 
alternatives  to  force  are  not  without  importance 
for  the  modern  age. 

1  Margolis,  Micah,  p.  25. 


IX 

MONARCHY  AND  THEOCRACY 

THE  constitution  of  the  Hebrew  people  through- 
out its  period  of  real  political  life — the  five  hun- 
dred years  from  Saul  to  Zedekiah — was  a  mon- 
archy. This  institution  was  so  prominent  in  the 
narrative  of  that  period  that  the  volumes  de- 
scribing it  received  the  titles,  "Kingdoms,"  or 
"Kings."  -The  existence  of  monarchical  govern- 
ment requires  little  explanation  or  comment.  It 
was  natural  to  the  stage  of  civilization  which  the 
Hebrews  reached  in  Canaan.  We  have  already 
described  the  simpler  organization  of  the  nomad 
and  seminomad  age,  and  we  are  prepared  to 
believe,  with  the  writers  of  Samuel  and  Deuteron- 
omy, that  the  kingship  was  adopted  only  by  imi- 
tation and  in  the  settled  life  of  Canaan.  It  was 
characteristic  of  their  Canaanite  neighbors,  and 
commended  itself  to  the  newcomers  for  obvious 
reasons,  like  many  of  the  other  inventions  of  civ- 
ilization. It  was  a  chief  rallying-point  for  national 
unity,  especially  in  war  and  self-defense.  It  was 
a  cure  for  anarchy.  It  was,  in  fact,  an  inevitable 
development.  Even  in  the  days  of  the  "Judges" 
when  "there  was  no  king  in  Israel,"  the  begin- 

74 


MONARCHY  AND  THEOCRACY  75 

nings  of  kingship  are  already  suggested  in  the 
careers  of  Gideon  and  Abimelech  and  of  Jeph- 
thah.  In  spite  of  later  comments  to  the  con- 
trary, and  the  actual  limitations  of  his  rule,  the 
appointment  of  Saul  was  to  his  contemporaries  a 
real  political  achievement,  while  in  David  and 
Solomon  the  national  life  reached  its  zenith. 

To  judge  from  our  records  the  Hebrew  mon- 
archy varied  in  its  first  century  through  a  con- 
siderable gamut.  Saul  is  represented  simply  as  a 
peasant  war-dictator,  called  from  the  plough  like 
Cincinnatus.  He  has  no  capital,  no  permanent 
organization,  no  hereditary  entail.  David  begins 
his  career  as  a  private  adventurer,  but  provides 
the  three  elements  of  established  monarchy  just 
mentioned,  while  his  son  approximates  the  typical 
Oriental  potentate.  It  is  important,  however,  to 
recall  that  "even  Solomon  in  all  his  glory"  was 
not  in  reality  the  absolute  monarch  that  legend 
made  of  him.  The  Hebrew  monarchy  never 
reached  the  despotism  and  autocracy  of  some 
industrial  empires,  past  and  modern.  Solomon 
and  many  other  kings  found  that  the  succession 
was  not  established  for  their  heirs  by  an  inalien- 
able right.  Throughout  the  half  millennium  of 
Hebrew  kingship  the  people  still  retained  a  close 
personal  relation  to  the  king,  and  collectively  or 
through  their  religious  or  military  leaders,  they 
exercised  a  democratic  control  that  was  equiva- 
lent to  constitutional  restraints.  As  the  anointed 


76  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

or  agent  of  God  and  as  the  servant  of  the  people,1 
the  king,  ideally  at  least,  was  not  an  unrestricted 
and  arbitrary  master.  And  it  was  no  mere  coun- 
sel of  perfection  when  the  Deuteronomist  enjoins 
that  the  king  write  a  copy  of  the  book  of  the  law 
and  "read  therein  all  the  days  of  his  life;  that  he 
may  learn  to  fear  Jehovah  his  God,  to  keep  all 
the  words  of  this  law  and  these  statutes,  to  do 
them;  that  his  heart  be  not  lifted  up  above  his 
brethren"  (Deut.  17:18-20). 

The  best  ideals  of  Hebrew  monarchy  were 
summed  up  for  the  future  in  the  name  of  David. 
That  by  contemporary  standards  he  seemed  a 
man  after  God's  own  heart  only  shows  that  he 
was  the  idol  of  his  people.  He  entertained  in  his 
lifetime  the  genuine  respect  and  gratitude  of  his 
subjects,  much  as  Augustus  for  similar  reasons  re- 
ceived the  adoration  of  a  wider  empire.  In  his 
own  tribe,  at  least,  his  name  carried  such  weight 
that  his  family  were  retained  permanently  in 
power,  and  it  was  easy  to  imagine  that  their 
throne  would  be  eternal.  When  foreign  conquest 
destroyed  all  political  independence,  the  family  of 
David  was  still  the  present  or  future  hope.  The 
shoot  from  the  stock  of  Jesse,  the  prince  from 
Bethlehem,  the  lion  of  the  tribe  of  Jiidah,  express 
the  promise  of  freedom,  righteousness,  and  happi- 
ness in  the  Hebrew  Utopia,  whether  on  earth  or  in 
heaven.  And  even  if  the  king  is  not  named,  the 
n  Kings  12:7. 


MONARCHY  AND  THEOCRACY  77 

royal  institution  became  a  frequent  and  natural 
assumption  in  the  national  hope.  "Blessed  is 
the  coming  kingdom  of  our  father  David."1 

In  spite  of  its  ultimate  idealization,  the  institu- 
tion of  monarchy  in  Israel  was  not  without  its 
critics.  To  the  conservative,  to  whom  all  new 
things  were  an  abomination,  it  belonged  to  the 
condemned  category.  It  was  a  mark  of  civiliza- 
tion, and  in  the  conflict  of  cultures  that  we  have 
described  it  shared  something  of  the  stigma  that, 
in  the  eyes  of  one  party,  attached  to  every  alien 
institution.  There  is  little  doubt  that  the  old 
tribal  and  local  independence  was  still  jealously 
prized  by  the  former  bedouin,  and  that  the  petty 
sheiks  looked  askance  upon  their  loss  of  sover- 
eignty. 

The  economic  burdens  of  royalty  aroused  more 
general  opposition.  In  Samuel's  description  of 
the  "manner  of  the  king"  (I  Sam.  8:11-18),  an 
unknown  writer  has  presented,  presumably  from 
experience,  the  methods  of  regal  expropriation 
which  were  current  in  any  developed  kingdom. 
There  was  confiscation  of  all  kinds  of  property, 
including  children  and  servants.  A  still  more  de- 
tailed description  is  given  in  the  customs  of  Solo- 
mon, with  his  conscription  for  war,  his  corvee  for 
his  royal  buildings,  and  his  system  of  universal 
taxation  for  the  support  of  an  expensive  court 
and  harem.  It  was  the  fear  of  this  burden  which 
*  Mark  11:10. 


78  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

at  Solomon's  death  estranged  the  hearts  of  Israel 
from  the  house  of  David;  and  it  was  this,  too, 
which  together,  perhaps,  with  provincial  jealousy 
and  the  backing  of  Egyptian  support,  gave  to 
Jeroboam,  Solomon's  former  superintendent  of 
the  forced  labor,  the  majority  leadership.  The 
prophets  Ahijah  and  Shemaiah  favored  this  dem- 
ocratic revolt.  Later  Elijah  appears  in  the  same 
role  of  proletarian  spokesman  and  sympathizer 
against  the  tyranny  of  royalty  and  its  secret 
crimes,  and  as  the  original  instigator  of  another 
revolt.  The  same  complaints  against  the  luxury 
and  oppression  of  kings  and  nobles  appear  in  the" 
sermons  of  the  "writing"  prophets.  Amos  and 
Isaiah  arraign  particularly  the  oppressive  extrav- 
agance of  the  women.  And  in  the  same  spirit 
the  Book  of  Deuteronomy  advises  sumptuary  re- 
strictions for  the  king. 

The  same  writer,  no  doubt  depending  upon 
some  bitter  experience,  warns  equally  against  the 
multiplication  of  wive^  and  the  multiplication  of 
horses  from  Egypt.  Here,  also,  his  motive  may 
have  been  considerations  of  expense,  but  more 
likely  his  fear  was  the  entangling  alliances  which 
threatened  Israel  through  these  royal  associations. 
To  these  two  causes  the  historians  of  the  mon- 
archy attributed  much  of  the  idolatrous  and  de- 
nationalizing influence  of  the  kings.  The  inter- 
national marriages  of  Solomon  and  Ahab  seemed 
serious  causes  of  religious  apostasy,  while  the  po- 


MONARCHY  AND  THEOCRACY  79 

litical  and  military  alliances,  which  such  mar- 
riages usually  ratified,  were  looked  upon  as  acts 
of  infidelity  and  lack  of  faith  toward  Jehovah. 
It  is  for  such  reasons  as  these  that  Hosea  in  the 
years  of  anarchy  before  the  fall  of  Samaria  speaks 
so  vigorously  against  the  kings  and  princes: 

"Where  is  thy  king  now?  that  he  may  save  thee, 
Or  all  thy  princes?  that  they  may  rule  thee; 
Those  of  whom  thou  hast  said, 
Give  me  a  king  and  princes. 
Aye,  I  give  thee  a  king  in  mine  anger, 
And  I  take  him  away  in  my  wrath  1"  * 

It  is  also  from  this  point  of  view  that  we  should 
understand  the  opposition  to  the  monarchy  ex- 
pressed in  one  of  the  narratives  of  the  election  of 
Saul.  Beside  the  older  and  more  primitive  ac- 
count in  I  Sam.  9:1-10:16  in  which  the  .king- 
ship has  the  approval  of  God  and  of  his  prophet 
Samuel,  there  is  in  chapter  8  and  allied  passages 
the  striking  view  that  human  royalty  is  a  usurpa- 
tion of  the  function  of  God.  To  the  prophet 
Jehovah  says  concerning  the  people's  request  for 
a  king,  "They  have  not  rejected  thee  but  they 
have  rejected  me,  that  I  should  not  be  a  king 
over  them,"  and  to  the  people  he  says,  "Ye  have 
this  day  rejected  your  God,  who.  himself  saveth 
you  out  of  all  your  calamities  and  your  distresses; 

1  Hosea  13:10,  11  (G.  A.  Smith's  translation);  cf.  8:4; 
9:9;  10:9. 


80  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

and  ye  have  said  unto  him,  Nay,  but  set  a  king 
over  us  ...  when  Jehovah  your  God  was  your 
king"  (10:19;  12:12).  It  is  the  same  spirit 
that  inspires  Gideon's  refusal  of  a  hereditary 
kingship:  "I  will  not  rule  over  you,  neither  shall 
my  son  rule  over  you:  Jehovah  shall  rule  over 
you"  (Judges  8:23). 

The  objection  as  here  stated  is  a  really  remark- 
able one.  For  while  it  is  a  common  Semitic  idea 
to  conceive  of  gods  as  kings,  as  Robertson  Smith 
has  shown  in  his  Religion  of  the  Semites,  it  rarely, 
if  ever,  elsewhere  is  thought  of  as  excluding 
anointed  representatives  and  agents.  As  Pro- 
fessor Moore  has  said:  "It  is  one  thing  to  ac- 
knowledge Jehovah  as  the  divine  king,  as  Isaiah, 
for  example,  does,  and  quite  a  different  thing  to 
conclude  that  he  cannot  endure  the  existence  of 
a  human  king  in  Israel.  This  is  by  no  means  a 
necessary  theological  inference;  it  must  have  had 
a  definite  historical  reason,  such  as  the  experience 
of  Israel  in  the  eighth  century  afforded."  1  Pos- 
sibly it  was  due  to  a  literalistic  interpretation  of 
the  common  religious  metaphor,  possibly  it  was 
due  to  an  inherent  nomadic  democracy  which 
long  survived  in  Israel  and  expressed  itself  in 
religious  terms,  but  certainly  it  reflects  the  natural 
pessimism  of  such  periods  of  alternate  despotism 
and  anarchy  as  the  age  of  Hosea. 

To  this  unusual  standpoint  is  largely  due  the 
1  Judges,  p.  230. 


MONARCHY  AND  THEOCRACY  81 

common  misuse  of  the  convenient  term  theoc- 
racy. As  often  defined,  theocracy  is  an  actual 
polity  of  government  in  which  all  human  king- 
ship is  excluded.  Thus  in  Hebrew  history  it 
has  been  applied  to  either  the  premonarchic  or 
the  postmonarchic  era.  It  was  customary,  in 
former  times,  for  example,  to  assign  the  term  to 
the  age  of  Moses  and  the  judges.  The  Mosaic 
constitution  was  distinguished,  we  are  told,  from 
all  others  in  being  "so  arranged  that  all  the 
organs  of  government  were  without  any  indepen- 
dent powers,  and  had  simply  to  announce  and 
to  execute  the  will  of  God  as  declared  by  priests 
and  prophets  or  reduced  to  writing  as  a  code  of 
Laws."  The  period  from  Moses  to  Samuel,  be- 
cause of  the  lack  of  human  organization,  "was  a 
time  of  continual  and  direct  dependence  on  the 
help  of  God  alone,  with  no  regular  means  of  gov- 
ernment, or  law,  or  army,  or  king."  l  Accord- 
ingly the  age  of  Samuel  meant  a  distinct  transi- 
tion not  from  anarchy  to  order,  but  from  the 
theocratic  to  the  human  type  of  government. 

Recent  scholars,  however,  do  not  accept  this 
view  as  more  than  the  merest  romance  of  later 
Hebrew  thought,  and  they  are  more  likely  to 
apply  the  term  theocracy  to  the  period  following 
the  monarchy.  To  them  theocracy  means  the 

1Kautzsch,  "Religion  of  Israel,"  in  Hastings'  Dictionary  of 
the  Bibk,  V.  630a;  Stanley,  History  of  the  Jewish  Church, 
Lect.  18. 


82  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

supremacy  of  the  church  over  the  state — a  hieroc- 
racy  or  control  of  government  by  the  priesthood — 
and  this  consummation  certainly  can  have  been 
achieved  only  after  the  exile.  The  term  then  is 
applied  to  the  latest  rather  than  the  earliest  period 
of  Israel.  It  is  from  this  later  view-point  that 
they  explain  not  only  the  condemnation  of  human 
monarchy  in  the  election  of  Saul,  but  also  the 
prominence  of  divine  leadership  in  the  late  nar- 
ratives of  the  Hexateuch  and  Judges. 

But  the  ideal  of  divine  sovereignty  certainly 
was  not  limited  in  Israel  to  the  extreme  view 
which  made  all  human  monarchy  irreconcilable 
in  principle  with  the  kingship  of  God.  It  was  a 
fundamental  and  permeating  influence  in  all  their 
political  life.  And  so  the  word  theocracy  cer- 
tainly deserves  wider  scope.  Even  Josephus, 
who  apparently  coined  the  word,  though  he  con- 
trasts the  Hebrew  constitution  with  the  various 
usual  forms  of  government — monarchies,  oligar- 
chies, democracies — and  declares,  "Our  lawgiver 
gave  attention  to  none  of  these,  but  ordained  our 
government  to  be  what,  by  a  strained  expression, 
may  be  termed  a  theocracy,  ascribing  the  sov- 
ereignty and  authority  to  God,"1  nevertheless 
does  not  condemn  the  monarchy  as  unconstitutional 
or  incongruous,  nor  hesitate  to  refer  to  his  nation, 
in  both  Mosaic  and  postexilic  times,  as  an  oli- 
garchy or  aristocracy.  And  while  we  would  not 
quarrel  over  terms,  yet  it  may  be  desirable  to 
1 C.  Apion,  ii,  16. 


MONARCHY  AND  THEOCRACY  83 

limit  theocracy  neither  to  the  sacerdotal  polity  of 
the  later  Levitical  legislation,  nor  to  the  earlier 
prophetic  picture  of  a  more  direct  divine  leader- 
ship, but  to  designate  under  that  name  the  in- 
dubitably historical  impression,  retained  by  the 
Hebrews  from  their  earliest  Semitic  beginnings 
through  all  the  changes  of  internal  organization 
and  international  relationship,  that  their  national 
life  in  all  its  forms  was  a  supreme  concern  of 
Jehovah. 

In  its  simplest  sense  this  theocracy  was  the 
personal  relationship  between  the  individual  citi- 
zen and  the  national  God.  Religion  and  govern- 
ment in  the  primitive  society  were,  both  of  them, 
democratic  and  unofficial.  In  ritual  each  man 
was  his  own  priest,  in  law  each  man  was  his  own 
judge — at  least,  each  minor  sheik  or  local  judge. 
In  both  religion  and  government  these  ideals  long 
persisted,  as  is  shown  by  the  lay  character  of 
Hebrew  prophecy  in  its  most  spontaneous  forms, 
and  by  the  frequent  democratic  leadership  in 
politics  and  reform.  As  an  ideal  it  found  expres- 
sion as  "a  kingdom  of  priests  and  a  holy  nation," 
in  which  no  man  should  need  to  teach  his  neigh- 
bor, saying,  "Know  Jehovah,"  but  all  should 
know  him,  from  the  least  unto  the  greatest. 
Even  the  most  developed  form  of  Levitical  piety 
laid  the  burden  of  religious  duty  on  each  individ- 
ual. Thus  in  all  his  acts  the  citizen  was  su- 
premely responsible  to  "  God,  the  invisible  King." 


84  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

But  the  visible  political  or  priestly  organiza- 
tions were  to  few  minds  in  real  conflict  either 
with  the  divine  supremacy  or  with  the  individual 
responsibility.  Both  the  king  and  the  priest  are 
the  anointed  servants  and  agents  of  God.  They 
are  the  interpreters  of  his  will  and  the  representa- 
tives of  his  rule.  They  do  not  interfere  either 
with  the  immediate  personal  duties,  both  religious 
and  patriotic,  of  men  to  God,  or  with  the  direct 
authority  of  God  himself  over  national  life.  Even 
the  kingship  as  an  institution  is  not  the  denial 
but  the  expression  of  the  theocratic  idea:  "the 
kingdom  of  Jehovah  in  the  hand  of  the  sons  of 
David,"  a  priestly  writer  still  calls  it  (II  Chron. 
13:8).  The  kings  do  not  infringe  upon  the 
royal  rights  of  God;  they  already  enjoy,  on  con- 
dition of  good  behavior  at  least,  a  little  of  the 
divine  right  of  kings.  The  real  conflict  of  sov- 
ereignties, if  any  is  to  be  thought  of,  is  between 
the  king  and  the  religious  representatives  of  God. 
Certainly  this  is  the  subject  that  bulks  most 
large  in  our  records,  coming  as  they  do  primarily 
from  prophetic  or  priestly  sources.  It  is  not  a 
conflict  of  church  and  state  in  the  later  sense,  but 
merely  the  insistence  that  the  religious  ideals 
should  be  supreme.  In  the  story  of  Saul's  rejec- 
tion we  see  something  of  the  theocratic  indig- 
nation at  the  disobedience  of  the  king  to  the 
commands  of  the  priest-prophet  Samuel.  And 
throughout  the  story  of  the  monarchies  there 


MONARCHY  AND  THEOCRACY  85 

recurs,  as  we  shall  see,1  the  same  ideal  in  which 
an  unofficial  prophetic  leadership  is  the  effective 
power  behind  the  throne. 

Of  all  the  functions  of  government  none  seemed 
more  exclusively  divine  than  law.  No  provision 
was  ever  made  in  Hebrew  society  for  conscious 
legislation.  Law  was  custom  derived  and  devel- 
oped from  an  unknown  past,  and  this  obscurity 
of  origin  by  a  primitive  naivet6  was  equivalent  to 
divinity  of  origin.  Hence  the  body  of  law,  oral 
and,  later,  written,  enjoyed  a  greater  sacredness 
as  time  went  on  than  either  the  executive  or  the 
judicial  branch  of  the  government.  Already  in 
Deuteronomy  kings  and  judges  are  only  students 
and  interpreters  of  the  law.  In  Ezekiel  the 
king  is  only  a  "prince"  with  somewhat  cur- 
tailed functions.  In  the  later  Levitical  move- 
ment the  supremacy  of  the  law  reaches  its  cul- 
mination. Here  the  priest  and  scribe  largely 
take  the  place  of  the  king  and  judge,  or  at  least 
take  place  beside  them,  as  the  priestly  document 
adds  Aaron  to  Moses.  The  transition  is,  how- 
ever, only  gradual.  Possibly  a  double  headship 
of  church  and  state  is  contemplated  for  a  time. 
The  two  olive-branches  of  Zechariah  represent 
Zerubbabel,  the  Davidic  prince,  and  Joshua,  the 
high  priest.  It  may  be  that  in  the  text  of  Zech- 
ariah or  its  corruptions,  and  in  the  story  of  Aaron's 
apostasy,  we  see  suggestions  of  unknown  rivalries 
1  Chapter  XVI. 


86  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

in  this  difficult  division  of  authority.  But  finally 
the  kingship  disappears  in  favor  of  the  hierarchy, 
whether  through  preference  for  the  latter,  or 
merely  as  the  making  of  a  virtue  out  of  necessity 
when  loss  of  independence  prevented  the  titles  if 
not  the  substance  of  local  self-government.  The 
nation  gave  place  to  a  church.  More  and  more 
the  priesthood  included  the  real  leadership.  1^ he 
insignia  of  monarchy — the  purple  and  the  diadem 
— became  the  high  priest's  prerogative.  Even 
the  Maccabees,  though  they  could  no  more  claim 
descent  from  Aaron  than  from  David,  preferred 
the  priestly  to  the  royal  titles,  exercising,  how- 
ever, all  civil  as  well  as  ecclesiastical  authority. 

With  the  disappearance  of  the  actual  mon- 
archy the  royal  hopes  of  the  house  of  David  be- 
came gradually  the  expression  of  a  distant  and 
difficult  ideal.  The  illegal  assumption  of  royalty 
by  the  later  Hasmoneans  and  the  Idumean  Herods 
only  made  more  intense  the  longing  for  a  true 
Davidic  kingdom.  This  coming  monarch — the 
real  anointed  one  (that  is,  Messiah  or  Christ), 
gives  his  name  to  the  whole  political  idealism  of 
later  Judaism.  He  appears  in  the  royal  psalms 
of  the  exilic  psalter,1 — the  echo  of  the  earlier 
monarchy,  in  the  Pharisaic  Psalms  of  Solomon  in 
the  age  of  Roman  conquest,  and  in  the  apoca- 
lyptic and  devotional  literature  of  late  Judaism. 
So,  at  least  in  the  future,  monarchy  and  theocracy 
iE.  g.,  Psalms  2,  20,  21,  72,  101,  110. 


MONARCHY  AND  THEOCRACY  87 

merge,  and  without  difficulty  or  distinction  men 
could  speak  of  the  kingdom  of  God  and  the  king- 
dom of  his  anointed.  Between  God  and  his 
agent  perfect  agreement  of  will  and  character 
were  to  exist.  From  these  political  ideals  of 
Judaism  there  came  to  Christianity  not  only  the 
terms  "Christ"  and  "kingdom  of  God,"  but  the 
natural  identification  or  confusion  of  the  two  royal 
personages,  God  and  Messiah.  From  the  same 
fruitful  source  of  political  idealism  Christianity 
derived  the  democracy  of  direct  universal  indi- 
vidual responsibility  to  God  and  nation,  and  the 
theocratic  ideal  of  organized  society,  expressing 
perfectly  the  will  of  God  when  "the  kingdom  of 
the  world  is  become  the  kingdom  of  our  Lord 
and  of  his  Christ."  1 

i  Rev.  11:15. 


RADICALS  AND   REFORMERS 

IT  is  convenient  to  mention,  in  connection  with 
the  great  national  institutions  with  which  our 
last  two  chapters  have  dealt,  a  phenomenon, 
which,  contrary  to  common  opinion,  probably 
exercises  more  influence  on  the  history  of  nations 
than  either  war  or  government.  I  speak  of  this 
factor  as  a  phenomenon,  for  it  is  impossible  to 
call  national  reformers  an  institution.  Sponta- 
neity is  their  chief  ear-mark;  organization  tends 
to  destroy  them,  or  at  least  while  it  embodies 
their  ideals,  it  does  not  create  or  foster  their  pro- 
gressive spirit.  But  alongside  of  any  organiza- 
tion there  exists  often  this  ferment  of  correction 
and  reform,  the  sporadic  and  yet  timely  leadership 
of  rebel  spirits  and  idealists. 

The  phenomenon  in  Hebrew  history  which 
answers  this  description  is  prophecy.  It  is  no 
Ipnger  necessary  to  teach  the  well-informed  Bible 
student  that  the  prophets  of  Israel  were  not  pri- 
marily theologians  nor  predicters  of  the  Messiah. 
They  were  the  stirring  social  preachers  of  their 
age,  the  watchmen  of  their  people's  moral  security, 
the  creators  of  the  new  ideals  of  the  nation,  and 

88. 


RADICALS  AND  REFORMERS  89 

the  harbingers  of  the  kingdom  of  God.  It  is  to 
them  and  to  the  ideals  for  which  they  stood  that 
Israel  owes  all  that  raised  it  from  the  level  of 
its  neighbors — whether  in  religion,  morality,  or 
national  ideals. 

Even  prophecy  itself,  though  it  was  the  lever 
of  a  noteworthy  development,  illustrates  the  de- 
velopmental character  of  all  elements  of  national 
life.  It  began  apparently  in  those  groups  of 
devotees  and  frantic  enthusiasts  whom  the  Bible 
calls  "the  sons  of  the  prophets,"  and  whom  it 
reveals  by  occasional  hints  in  a  somewhat  lurid 
and  unpromising  light.  In  many  different  lines 
one  can  readily  trace  the  evolution  of  the  great 
prophets  from  their  cruder  beginnings. 

In  the  first  place,  the  "sons  of  the  prophets" 
were  evidently  conservatives.  They  were  the 
champions  of  the  old  order  and  "the  old-time 
religion."  Their  communism,  their  dress  and 
appearance,  their  religion  of  emotion,  all  suggest 
the  desert  origin  like  that  of  the  modern  dervish. 
Amos  groups  them  with  the  Nazirites  (2:11), 
the  well-known  conservatives.  The  career  of  Eli- 
jah illustrates  this  adherence  to  the  nomadic  cul- 
ture. The  later  prophets  inherited  many  of  the 
same  archaic  characteristics.  The  personal  asceti- 
cism and  the  weird  boldness  continue  down  to 
John  the  Baptist.  The  prophets  were  rarely  the 
conscious  exponents  of  novelty.  On  the  con- 
trary, their  opposition  to  luxury,  to  religious  syn- 


90  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

cretism,  and  even  to  ritual  was  largely  based  on 
their  ideal  of  the  past.  They  were  often  the 
champions  of  ancient  democratic  liberties,  as  the 
right  of  peasants  to  their  inheritance,  the  right 
of  free  speech  and  of  fair  trial.  But  they  appear 
to  have  been  the  only  people  in  Israel  whose  con- 
servatism was  not  of  the  letter  but  of  the  spirit, 
and  who  translated  the  time-honored  principles  of 
religion  and  morality  to  meet  the  new  circum- 
stances of  their  day.  They  lived  at  a  time  when 
the  rise  of  Assyria  had  brought  to  the  Hebrews  a 
much  wider  political  horizon,  and  when  the  devel- 
opment of  civilization  had  produced  new  and 
acute  problems  in  the  social  order.  And  they 
met  these  changes  with  an  insight  into  underlying 
principles  that  was  so  profound  that  they  ap- 
peared to  be  iconoclasts  and  radicals.  They  op- 
posed the  laissez-faire  policy  of  society  and  poli- 
tics, drifting  on  new  and  unsuspected  currents 
toward  unspiritual  crystallization.  They  were  al- 
ways men  before  their  time,  respected  in  later 
generations  but  persecuted  in  their  own.  They 
were  always  members  of  that  uncomfortable 
minority  which,  contrary  to  the  assumption  of 
majority  rule,  is  more  often  right  than  wrong. 
Not  infrequently  they  came  into  open  conflict 
with  the  king  and  court.  They  were  leaders  of 
his  Majesty's  opposition.  To  Ahab  Elijah  was 
an  "enemy"  or  "troubler  of  Israel,"  and  Micaiah 
an  object  of  hate  (I  Kings  18:17;  21:20;  22:8). 


RADICALS  AND  REFORMERS  91 

Even  where  kings  avoided  violence  to  the  prophets 
their  restraints  were  more  often  due  to  supersti- 
tious fear  than  to  motives  of  agreement  or  prin- 
ciples of  toleration.  They  were  popularly  re- 
garded as  disturbers  of  the  peace,  as  the  foment- 
ers  of  revolution,  or  as  scourges  by  whom  God 
"hewed"  the  people,  and  whose  words  the  land 
could  not  bear  (Hosea  6:5;  Amos  7:10).  It 
can  hardly  be  doubted  that  this  estimate  had 
considerable  basis.  As  for  domestic  policy  our 
records  make  it  clear  that  the  prophets  took  an 
active  part  in  the  revolutions  of  Jeroboam  and  of 
Jehu,  while  their  constant  predictions  of  doom 
to  kings  or  dynasties  were  perhaps  rightly  con- 
strued as  threats  and  agitation  that  would  lead 
to  the  overthrow  of  the  reigning  monarchs.  In 
their  foreign  policy  the  prophets  seemed  equally 
injurious  to  the  strength  of  national  life.  They 
were  no  doctrinaire  pacifists,  but  they  so  fre- 
quently opposed  the  military  ambitions  of  the 
aristocracy,  not  only  in  wars  of  aggression  but 
also  in  wars  for  reconquest  or  even  defense,  that 
they  appeared  to  have  no  concern  for  the  political 
welfare  of  the  state  or  even  for  its  independence. 
What  has  been  said  of  Elijah  may  in  a,  sense  be 
transferred  to  them  all: 

The  work  of  Elijah  foreshadows  that  of  the  prophets 
of  Judah,  who  in  like  manner  had  no  small  part  in 
breaking  up  the  political  life  of  the  kingdom.  The 
prophets  were  never  patriots  of  the  common  stamp,  to 


92  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

whom  national  interests  stand  higher  than  the  abso- 
lute claims  of  religion  and  morality. 

Had  Elijah  been  merely  a  patriot  to  whom  the  state 
stood  above  every  other  consideration,  he  would  have 
condoned  the  faults  of  a  king  who  did  so  much  for  the 
greatness  of  a  nation;  but  the  things  for  which  Elijah 
contended  were  of  far  more  worth  than  the  national 
existence  of  Israel,  and  it  is  a  higher  wisdom  than  that 
of  patriotism,  which  insists  that  divine  truth  and  civil 
righteousness  are  more  than  all  the  counsels  of  state- 
craft. Judged  from  a  merely  political  point  of  view, 
Elijah's  work  had  no  other  result  than  to  open  a  way 
for  the  bloody  and  unscrupulous  ambition  of  Jehu,  and 
lay  bare  the  frontiers  of  the  land  to  the  ravages  of 
the  ferocious  Hazael.1 

In  the  second  place,  Hebrew  prophecy  broke 
with  the  institutions  of  religion  as  well  as  of  poli- 
tics. But  to  make  this  plain  one  must  carefully 
distinguish  between  two  uses  of  the  term  prophecy. 
On  the  one  hand  there  are  those  roving  bands 
that  first  meet  us  in  the  days  of  Saul — "the  sons 
of  the  prophets/'  who  became  later  a  regular 
guild.  On  the  other  hand,  there  are  a  series  of 
national  leaders  whom  men  call  "the  prophets" 
par  excellence.  They  differed  from  the  guild 
prophets  in  their  greater  spontaneity,  and  in  the 
extraordinary  moral  and  intellectual  power  which 
they  displayed.  They  were  by  nature  too  inde- 
pendent to  be  organized;  they  spoke  in  "divers 
portions  and  in  divers  manners";  they  were  mostly 

i  W.  R.  Smith,  The  Prophets  of  Israel,  p.  78. 


RADICALS  AND  REFORMERS  93 

without  much  conscious  fellowship,  except  with 
God  and  with  like-minded  men  of  the  past.  It  is 
difficult,  therefore,  to  fix  the  time  or  manner  of 
their  origin.  It  was  easy  to  read  the  ideal  back 
to  Moses  and  the  founding  of  the  nation,  as  Deu- 
teronomy did,  or  even  to  the  beginnings  of  the 
world  with  the  author  of  Acts.  If,  however,  fol- 
lowing another  suggestion  of  the  same  writer,1 
Samuel  is  chosen  as  the  first  prophet,  then  we 
shall  be  able  to  assign  to  one  and  the  same  era 
not  only  the  first  signs  of  kingship  and  of  the 
institution  of  prophecy,  but  also  the  beginning  of 
the  uninstitutionalized  leadership. 

At  first  the  connection  between  tne  two  kinds 
of  prophecy  was  intimate.  Samuel  himself, 
though  he  was  brought  up  as  a  priest,  and  was 
called  a  seer,  as  well  as  the  last  of  the  judges,  was 
closely  associated  with  the  sons  of  the  prophets, 
though  in  the  perspective  of  history  he  rises  above 
them  by  his  individuality.  Like  him,  also,  Elijah 
and  Elisha  are  represented  as  leaders  of  the 
prophetic  guild.  But  from  that  time  on  the  gulf 
between  the  individual  prophet  and  the  prophetic 
institution  was  a  constantly  widening  one.  Amos 
carefully  differentiated  himself  from  the  prophets, 
and  they  became  one  of  the  chief  obstacles  of 
other  prophets.  Perhaps  the  divergence  was  due 
to  changes  on  both  sides.  The  guilds  of  the 
prophets  were  an  organization,  and  as  such  nat- 
*Acts  3:24,  contrast  3:21,  Luke  1:70. 


94  -     NATIONAL  IDEALS 

urally  became  more  and  more  associated  with 
other  organizations.  They  were  from  the  first 
aligned  with  kings  and  priests.  They  became  an 
appendage  of  the  court,  maintained  at  royal  ex- 
pense. They  were,  therefore,  no  longer  indepen- 
dent of  popular  or  official  opinion.  They  were 
accused  of  prophesying  only  for  hire  and  only  to 
suit  the  wishes  of  the  king  or  people.  They 
shared  the  drunkenness,  luxury,  and  immorality 
of  the  court.  There  are  several  incidents  which 
confirm  this  impression  of  their  mercenary  and 
servile  character.  The  individual  prophet,  on  the 
other  hand,  was,  as  we  have  said,  essentially  spon- 
taneous. He  was  a  layman,  especially  called  for 
a  purpose;  he  was  too  independent  to  be  organ- 
ized. And  while  a  spiritual  kinship  connects  all 
the  prophets  of  all  generations,  a  kinship  which 
Jesus  and  even  some  of  the  prophets  themselves 
were  conscious  of  sharing,  it  was  not  always  evi- 
dent to  their  contemporaries  who  persecuted  and 
despitefully  used  them,  while  building  the  tombs 
of  their  honored  predecessors.  In  his  own  day 
the  prophet  was  the  lonely  critic  of  the  very  insti- 
tution which  should  have  been  his  home.  When 
he  came  to  his  own  his  own  received  him  not. 

Even  more  clear  was  the  opposition  between 
prophet  and  priest — not  as  though  two  rival  in- 
stitutions or  classes  were  consciously  opposing 
each  other,  but  because  there  was  between  the 
two  groups  an  inherent  unlikeness  of  tempera- 


RADICALS  AND  REFORMERS  95 

ment.  The  difference  between  the  formalist  and 
the  mystic,  between  the  ecclesiastic  and  the 
spiritual  reformer,  between  the  Pharisees  and 
Jesus,  is  a  psychological  contrast  too  familiar  to 
need  definition.  There  is  usually  an  element  of 
misunderstanding  on  each  side.  The  priest  seems 
too  confident  of  his  ritual,  and  too  indifferent  to 
morality  and  inward  religion.  The  prophet  of- 
fends him  as  destructive  and  iconoclastic.  Cer- 
tain it  is  that  the  Hebrew  prophets  during  their 
prime  attacked  the  formal  sacrifices  with  as  much 
violence  as  they  did  the  sheerest  idolatry  and 
heathenism.  From  Amos  through  the  Psalter 
there  runs  an  antisacrificial  note,  in  spite  of  the 
apparently  mediating  work  of  Ezekiel  and  Deu- 
teronomy. Justice  is  contrasted  with  oblations, 
loving-kindness  with  sacrifice,  moral  cleansing 
with  prayers  and  Sabbaths,  charity  with  formal 
fasts.  By  such  arraignments  and  odious  com- 
parisons, and  even  more  vigorously  by  their  em- 
phasis on  the  revolutionary  implications  of  their 
awakened  social  conscience,  the  prophets  won  in 
religion  as  well  as  in  politics  the  name  of  radicals 
and  heretics. 

But  the  growth  from  humble  beginnings  is 
shown  by  the  positive  as  well  as  the  negative  ele- 
ments in  prophecy.  From  its  earliest  form  proph- 
ecy was  a  zeal  for  the  national  Jehovah.  "I  have 
been  very  jealous  for  Jehovah,  the  God  of  hosts/' 
was  the  claim  of  Elijah.  And  this  religious  basis 


96  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

was  never  lacking  in  the  true  prophets.  But  the 
expression  of  religion  was  completely  transformed. 
Instead  of  the  mantic  and  divination  of  the  seer, 
and  instead  of  the  ecstatic  frenzy  of  the  sons  of 
the  prophets,  the  word  of  God  came  to  them  in 
forms  of  religious  insight  and  moral  definiteness 
that  have  stood  the  tests  of  long  time.  Of  course 
the  primitive  and  crude  were  not  easily  removed. 
Their  treasure  was  in  earthen  vessels: 

"For  every  fiery  prophet  in  old  times, 
And  all  the  sacred  madness  of  the  bard, 
When  God  made  music  through  them,  could  but 

speak 
His  music  by  the  framework  and  the  chord." 

But  the  old  fire  of  genuine  inspiration  was  largely 
refined  and  enlarged.  Religion  was  translated 
into  social  and  ethical  values.  There  was  in  the 
divine  call  a  more  urgent  sense  of  duty  to  the 
nation,  as  of  a  watchman  who  must  warn  his 
countrymen,  whether  they  will  hear  or  whether 
they  will  forbear.  There  was  in  it,  also,  the  more 
moving  power  of  personal  relation  to  God.  From 
this  individual  religion  and  this  social  conscience 
was  born  not  a  patriotism  of  the  vulgar  type,  but 
the  purest  love  for  a  wayward  nation,  like  the 
love  of  God.  Perhaps  even  the  earliest  prophetic 
movement  was  kindled  by  great  national  devotion 
at  military  crises — the  raids  and  invasions  of  the 
Philistines  in  the  days  of  Samuel.  But  "the 


RADICALS  AND  REFORMERS  97 

patriotic  enthusiasm  of  the  uprising  against  Philis- 
tine domination  began  to  lift  the  prophets  clear 
of  the  function  and  the  magical  implements  of 
soothsaying.  .  .  .  Their  predictions  henceforth 
were  national  in  scope  and  based  on  fundamental 
moral  laws  and  convictions.  Thus  patriotism  was 
the  emancipating  power  which  set  the  feet  of  the 
prophetic  order  on  that  new  and  higher  path 
which  was  destined  to  lift  them  far  above  the 
soothsayers  of  other  nations  with  whom  they 
started  on  a  common  level.  That  religious  pas- 
sion which  had  turned  against  a  foreign  invader 
was  equally  ready  to  turn  against  the  domestic 
oppressors  of  the  people."  1 

This  sense  of  religious  conviction  is  not  to  be 
obscured  by  all  we  have  said  of  their  political  and 
economic  and  ecclesiastical  policy.  Fundamen- 
tally they  had  no  policy  at  all.  In  all  these 
realms  they  were  neither  theorists  nor  executives, 
but  voices  of  protest  and  reform.  To  their  oppo- 
nents they  seemed  often  to  be  dealing  with  these 
subjects  on  the  same  plane  as  their  own,  to  be 
representatives  merely  of  another  party  or  class 
or  creed.  But  this  was  scarcely  the  case. 

The  prominence  which  the  prophets  assign  to  social 
grievances  and  civil  disorders  has  often  led  to  their 
being  described  as  politicians,  a  democratic  Opposition 
in  the  aristocratic  state.  This  is  a  total  misconcep- 
tion. The  prophets  of  the  eighth  century  have  no 

1  Rauschenbusch,  Christianity  and  the  Social  Crisis,  pp.  23 /. 


98  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

new  theories  of  government,  and  propose  no  practical 
scheme  of  political  readjustment.  They  are  the  friends 
of  the  poor  because  they  hate  oppression,  and  they 
attack  the  governing  classes  for  their  selfishness  and 
injustice;  but  their  cry  is  not  for  better  institutions  but 
for  better  men,  not  for  the  abolition  of  aristocratic 
privileges  but  for  an  honest  and  godly  use  of  them. 
The  work  of  the  prophets  is  purely  religious.  .  .  . 
But  to  the  prophets  the  observance  of  justice  and 
mercy  in  the  State  are  the  first  elements  of  religion.1 

It  was  only  by  resolutely  maintaining  this  adhe- 
rence to  principles  rather  than  to  parties  or  plat- 
forms that  the  prophets  were  able  to  retain  for 
so  many  centuries  the  spirit  of  spontaneity  and 
the  actual  constructive  leadership  in  the  na- 
tion. 

And  it  is  the  same  quality — a  neutrality  toward 
parties  and  an  insistence  on  principles — that  gave 
the  prophets  an  aloofness  even  from  national  par- 
tisanship and  an  almost  international  view-point. 
Gradually  and  incompletely,  yet  in  striking  de- 
gree, the  prophets  surpassed  even  the  claims  of 
patriotism.  As  a  god  of  justice,  Jehovah  seemed 
to  them  superior  to  national  prejudices  and  par- 
tisanship. He  was  no  respecter  of  persons.  His 
covenant  was  not  a  preferential  treaty.  By  their 
own  superpatriotism  the  prophets  contributed  to 
a  supernational  religion.  Frequently,  as  we  have 
said,  this  neutrality  appeared  in  the  eyes  of  their 

1 W.  R.  Smith,  The  Old  Testament  in  the  Jewish  Church, 
second  ed.,  p.  348. 


RADICALS  AND  REFORMERS  99 

opponents  as  nothing  less  than  rank  treason,  but 
as  a  higher  loyalty  it  created  in  the  prophets  the 
highest  ideals  of  national  allegiance  and  service. 
It  also  made  them  more  impartial  judges  of  the 
nations  round  about.  It  was  difficult  for  them 
not  to  share  some  of  the  racial  prejudices  long  in- 
stilled in  their  Hebrew  blood  and  fanned  by  wars 
and  foreign  oppression.  They  are  not  wholly  free 
from  provincial  chauvinism.  Yet  Amos  could 
realize  the  equivalence  of  Israel's  guilt  to  that  of 
her  foes,  Isaiah  could  recognize  the  Assyrian  em- 
pire as  God's  tool  and  agent,  while  to  a  Jewish 
contemporary  Cyrus  the  Persian  assumed  the 
position  of  a  real  though  unconscious  Messiah.1 

Indeed,  some  of  the  most  illuminating  side- 
lights on  the  national  ideals  of  the  prophets  are 
their  oracles  on  foreign  nations.  The  material  is 
abundant.  Besides  the  judgment  of  Obadiah  upon 
Edom,  of  Nahum  on  Nineveh,  and  of  Habakkuk 
on  the  Chaldeans,  a  considerable  section  in  each 
of  the  major  prophets  is  a  collection  of  similar 
prophecies.2  It  is  true  that  in  most  cases  the  ver- 
dict is  unfavorable,  but  the  prophets'  reason  is 
not  merely  Hebrew  patriotism  or  hatred;  it  is  not 
even  religious  intolerance;  it  is  the  fundamentally 
immoral  and  antisocial  national  vices  in  their 
neighbors  or  masters,  like  the  commercialism  of 
Tyre,  or  the  arrogant  militarism  of  Assyria, 

1  Amos  1,  2;  Isaiah  10:5#.;  45:1. 

2  Isaiah  13-23;  Jer.  46-51;  Ezek.  25-32. 


X 

100  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

which,  no  more  and  no  less  than  in  their  own 
nation,  seemed  to  these  Hebrew  spectators  the 
sure  promise  of  Divine  judgment. 


XI 

RUTHLESSNESS  ABROAD  AND  AT  HOME 

PREACHING  is  so  regular  a  part  of  modern  wor- 
ship that  we  are  apt  to  forget  that  it  is  a  compara- 
tive innovation.  The  earliest  religion  consisted 
in  prayer  and  sacrifice  and  had  no  place  for  ex- 
hortation. The  modern  sermon  apparently  is  to 
be  traced  back  for  its  origin  to  the  movement 
called  Hebrew  prophecy.  Out  of  the  obscurity 
of  primitive  religion,  out  of  the  formalism  of 
ritual  worship,  there  emerged  in  Israel  a  series  of 
inspired  teachers  or  preachers,  who  spoke  directly 
to  the  men  of  their  day,  rebuking  them  for  sin 
and  pointing  the  way  to  national  reform.  They 
were  an  early  "Mission  of  National  Repentance 
and  Hope."  The  names  of  most  of  them  are  for- 
gotten and  many  of  their  sermons  are  lost.  But 
in  four  large  volumes  their  literary  remains  have 
been  collected  and  preserved — Isaiah,  Jeremiah, 
Ezekiel,  and  the  Twelve. 

By  general  consent  the  oldest  of  these  so-called 
"writing  prophets"  is  Amos,  the  herdsman  of 
Tekoa.  He  lived  in  the  silver  age  of  Jeroboam's 
kingdom,  under  Jeroboam  the  Second.  The  land 
of  Palestine — the  Belgium  of  antiquity — though 
ringed  about  with  enemy  nations  great  and  small, 
was  enjoying  temporary  peace  and  prosperity 
101 


IDEALS 


prior  to  the  bursting  of  the  great  Assyrian  storm. 
The  northern  kingdom,  through  two  centuries  of 
independence,  had  acquired  some  sense  of  na- 
tional pride  or  at  least  a  strong  national  antipathy 
to  the  inveterate  foes  that  surrounded  it.  For  a 
hundred  years  the  strong  house  of  Jehu,  by  suc- 
cessful wars  and  diplomacy,  had  not  merely 
avoided  civil  war  and  anarchy  and  held  its  king- 
dom intact,  but  had  even  enlarged  its  borders, 
extended  its  commerce,  and  enriched  its  nobles 
and  merchants. 

To  Bethel,  the  religious  centre  of  the  kingdom, 
came  the  Judean  peasant,  Amos.  His  first  words 
were  well  calculated  to  win  the  approval  of  his 
hearers.  In  turn  he  mentioned  the  chief  foes  of 
Israel,  he  rehearsed  their  outrages  on  justice  and 
international  law,  and  promised  for  them  a  terrible 
destruction. 

Thus  saith  Jehovah:  For  three  transgressions  of 
Damascus,  yea,  for  four,  I  will  not  turn  away  the 
punishment  thereof;  because  they  have  threshed  Gilead 
with  threshing  instruments  of  iron.  But  I  will  send  a 
fire  into  the  house  of  Hazael,  and  it  shall  devour  the 
palaces  of  Ben-hadad.  And  I  will  break  the  bar  of 
Damascus,  and  cut  off  the  inhabitant  from  the  valley 
of  Aven,  and  him  that  holdeth  the  sceptre  from  the 
house  of  Eden;  and  the  people  of  Syria  shall  go  into 
captivity  unto  Kir,  saith  Jehovah  (Amos  1:3-5). 
i 

One  by  one  with  repeated  refrain  the  surround- 
ing nations  are  condemned.  Gaza,  the  next  to  be 


RUTHLESSNESS  103 

mentioned,  represents  the  old  Philistine  alliance 
that  had  fought  so  stubbornly  with  Saul  and 
David  for  the  control  of  Canaan.  "For  three 
transgressions  of  Gaza,  yea,  for  four,  I  will  not 
turn  away  the  punishment  thereof;  because  they 
carried  away  captive  the  whole  people,  to  deliver 
them  up  to  Edom."  And  so  Amos  swings  around 
the  circle,  mentioning  the  charge  against  each 
offender  and  threatening  a  suitable  doom.  Tyre 
is  guilty  because  it  had  "remembered  not  the 
covenant  of  brothers";  Edom,  "because  he  did 
pursue  his  brother  with  the  sword,  and  did  cast 
off  all  pity,  and  his  anger  did  tear  perpetually, 
and  he  kept  his  wrath  for  ever";  the  children  of 
Ammon,  "  because  they  have  ripped  up  the  women 
with  child  of  Gilead,  that  they  may  enlarge  their 
border." 

Very  modern  is  this  series  of  atrocities  which 
Israel  had  suffered  at  the  hands  of  its  neighbors — 
the  iron  flail  of  Syrian  conquest  in  Gilead,  whole- 
sale deportations  of  the  population  by  Gaza  and 
Tyre,  treating  as  scraps  of  paper  the  treaties  of 
peace,  relentless,  military  ruthlessness,  gruesome 
mutilation  of  non-combatants  for  the  sake  of 
aggressive  imperialism,  and  the  blighting  of  lives 
unborn.  One  can  readily  picture  the  sympathy 
and  righteous  indignation  with  which  the  prophet's 
hearers  applauded  his  pronouncement  of  the  con- 
demnation of  God  upon  the  frightfulness  of  their 
foes.  Even  in  cases  where  they  were  neutrals,  as 


104  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

between  Moab  and  Edom,  the  Hebrews  would 
share  the  prophet's  horror  for  the  Moabite  vio- 
lators of  natural  decency  and  international  law 
who  had  "burned  the  bones  of  the  king  of  Edom 
into  lime/' 

But  suddenly  a  change  comes  over  the  faces 
of  the  Bethelite  revellers.  Unexpectedly  the 
prophet  brings  the  charge  home  to  Israel  itself. 
With  the  same  hammerlike  refrain  he  begins 
again:  "For  three  transgressions  of  Israel,  yea, 
for  four,  I  will  not  turn  away  the  punishment 
thereof."  The  condemnation  that  they  had  so 
eagerly  welcomed  when  applied  to  their  enemies 
is  now  laid  upon  themselves.  Having  burned 
with  righteous  indignation  at  the  mote  in  an- 
other's eye  they  had  failed  to  see  the  beam  in 
their  own  eye.  They,  too,  were  guilty  of  fright- 
fulness.  That  is  the  prophet's  swift  and  hard 
blow  upon  them. 

There  were  two  specially  striking  equations  in 
this  unexpected  arraignment.  Such  a  condemna- 
tion of  Israel  would  seem  to  those  who  heard  not 
merely  unpleasant;  it  would  be  both  unpatriotic 
and  blasphemous.  They  believed  that  they  were 
a  people  of  special  privilege  and  position.  They 
were  the  chosen  of  Jehovah  and  he  was  on  their 
side.  Whatever  they  did  was  right  and  their 
foes  were  the  foes  of  God,  also.  This  patriotic 
assumption  Amos  boldly  challenged.  In  the 
sight  of  Jehovah,  he  declares,  all  nations  are  on 


RUTHLESSNESS  105 

the  same  level.  There  is  no  place  before  him  for 
special  pleading.  Twice  again  Amos  reverts  to 
this  same  theme  and  each  time  he  attacks  squarely 
one  of  the  favorite  bases  of  national  assumption. 
Two  events  were  evidently  considered  chief  proofs 
of  God's  special  favor  for  Israel — one  in  the  past, 
the  deliverance  from  Egypt,  the  other  in  the 
future,  the  day  of  Jehovah.  No  event  in  their 
history  was  so  often  cited  as  a  sign  of  God's  choice 
and  care  of  Israel  as  the  Exodus.  It  is  constantly 
mentioned  in  the  Hebrew  scriptures  (e.  g.t  Amos 
2:9,  10).  Amos  does  not  deny  the  hand  of  God 
in  this  event;  he  merely  calls  attention  to  parallels 
in  God's  favor  to  their  enemies,  the  Philistines 
and  Syrians: 

Are  ye  not  as  the  children  of  the  Ethiopians  unto 
me,  O  children  of  Israel?  saith  Jehovah.  Have  not  I 
brought  up  Israel  out  of  the  land  of  Egypt,  and  the 
Philistines  from  Caphtor,  and  the  Syrians  from  Kir? 
Behold  the  eyes  of  the  Lord  Jehovah  are  upon  the  sin- 
ful kingdom,  and  I  will  destroy  it  from  off  the  face  of 
the  earth  (Amos  9:7,  8). 

In  similar  fashion  Amos  corrects  the  prevailing 
view  of  the  final  judgment  of  God.  The  Hebrews, 
after  the  manner  of  national  religionists,  had  so 
identified  their  God  with  their  own  interests  that 
they  had  looked  upon  his  triumph  as  the  day  of 
their  own  success.  They  used  "the  day  of  Jeho- 
vah" much  as  modern  schoolboys  use  the  term 


106  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

"our  day,"  or  the  modern  jingo  uses  "der  Tag." 
They  did  not  expect  God  to  be  an  international 
neutral.  Amos  plainly  warns  them  of  their  mis- 
take. 

Woe  unto  you  that  desire  the  day  of  Jehovah! 
Wherefore  would  ye  have  the  day  of  Jehovah?  It  is 
darkness,  and  not  light.  As  if  a  man  did  flee  from  a 
lion,  and  a  bear  met  him;  or  went  into  the  house  and 
leaned  his  hand  on  the  wall,  and  a  serpent  bit  him. 
Shall  not  the  day  of  Jehovah  be  darkness,  and  not 
light?  even  very  dark,  and  no  brightness  in  it 
(Amos  5:18-20)? 

But  more  novel  still  was  the  second  equation  of 
Amos's  sermon,  for  it  was  an  equation  between 
two  kinds  of  sin.  The  same  refrain  that  so  boldly 
condemned  Israel  to  the  same  punishment  as  its 
heathen  foes  clearly  associated  with  their  enemies' 
crimes,  crimes  of  a  different  nature.  The  three  or 
four  transgressions  of  their  neighbors  had  been 
atrocities  in  war  and  ruthless  conquest.  Israel's 
past  history,  too,  had  been  marked  by  similar 
acts,1  but  it  is  not  these  that  the  prophet  chooses 
to  classify  with  the  crimes  of  the  Syrians  and  the 
Philistines.  It  is  sins  of  the  domestic  regime,  of 
the  industrial  and  social  order  at  home. 

Thus   saith   Jehovah:   For  three   transgressions  of 
Israel,  yea,  for  four,  I  will  not  turn  away  the  punish- 
ment thereof;  because  they  have  sold  the  righteous  for 
silver  and  the  needy  for  a  pair  of  shoes — they  that 
1E,  g.,  II  Sam.  12:29-31. 


RUTHLESSNESS  107 

pant  after  the  dust  of  the  earth  on  the  head  of  the 
poor,  and  turn  aside  the  way  of  the  meek:  and  a  man 
and  his  father  go  unto  the  same  maiden  to  profane 
my  holy  name:  and  they  lay  themselves  down  beside 
every  altar  upon  clothes  taken  in  pledge;  and  in  the 
house  of  their  God  they  drink  the  wine  of  such  as  have 
been  fined  (Amos  2:6-8). 

Under  the  same  condemnation  as  the  atrocities 
of  war  are  the  atrocities  of  peace;  in  the  same 
category  with  exploitation  of  foreign  peoples  is 
the  exploitation  of  the  lower  classes  at  home.  In- 
dustrial slavery  is  on  the  same  level  as  political 
slavery,  and  the  ruthlessness  of  the  forum  and 
the  market-place  is  as  unpardonable  as  that  of 
the  battle-field.  Repeatedly  the  prophet  returns 
to  this  theme — bribery,  greed,  oppressive  luxury, 
violence,  perversion  of  legal  justice,  monopoly, 
false  measures,  adulterated  food,  and  all  die  other 
evils  of  a  corrupt  industrial  order.  Even  though 
these  crimes  are  done  in  the  name  of  religion  and 
under  the  shadow  of  the  altar,  they  are  none  the 
less  crimes.  Fair  names  and  ideals,  the  formal 
worship  of  God,  and  scrupulous  observance  of 
certain  religious  rites,  are  no  real  cloak  for  injus- 
tice and  crime. 

I  hate,  I  despise  your  feasts,  and  I  will  take  no 
delight  in  your  solemn  assemblies.  Yea,  though  ye 
offer  me  your  burnt-offerings  and  meal-offerings,  I  will 
not  accept  them;  neither  will  I  regard  the  peace- 
offerings  of  your  fat  beasts.  Take  thou  away  from 


108  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

me  the  noise  of  thy  songs;  for  I  will  not  hear  the  mel- 
ody of  thy  viols.  But  let  justice  roll  down  as  wa- 
ters, and  righteousness  as  a  mighty  stream  (Amos  5: 
21-24). 

The  effects  of  this  sermon  of  Amos  are  not  ex- 
plicitly recorded,  but  they  are  not  hard  to  con- 
jecture. The  kingdom  of  Israel,  we  know,  sur- 
vived for  only  a  few  years.  Amos  himself,  no 
doubt,  met  the  rebuffs  of  a  true  prophet.  One 
illuminating  incident  is  told : 

Then  Amaziah,  the  priest  of  Bethel,  sent  to  Jero- 
boam, king  of  Israel,  saying,  Amos  hath  conspired 
against  thee  in  the  midst  of  the  house  of  Israel:  the 
land  is  not  able  to  bear  all  his  words.  For  thus  Amos 
saith,  Jeroboam  shall  die  by  the  sword,  and  Israel  shall 
surely  be  led  away  captive  out  of  his  land.  Also  Ama- 
ziah said  unto  Amos,  O  thou  seer,  go,  flee  thou  away 
into  the  land  of  Judah,  and  there  eat  bread,  and 
prophesy  there:  but  prophesy  not  again  any  more  at 
Bethel,  for  it  is  the  king's  sanctuary,  and  it  is  a  royal 
house  (Amos  7:10-13). 

It  is  significant  that  the  opposition  was  from 
the  official,  not  of  the  state,  but  of  orthodox  reli- 
gion. With  zeal  characteristic  of  his  class  he 
reported  Amos  to  government  headquarters  as  a 
disturber  of  the  peace,  and  converted  unpopular 
propaganda  into  constructive  treason.  Typical, 
too,  are  his  words  to  the  prophet  himself.  He  de- 
sires to  silence  his  unpatriotic  moral  criticism — 
or,  at  least,  to  forbid  him  the  publicity  of  the 


RUTHLESSNESS  109 

capital  and  to  censor  the  sentiments  which  pil- 
grims to  the  shrine  would  be  likely  to  hear  and 
disseminate.  Perhaps  like  many  officials  of  reli- 
gion since,  he  felt  some  responsibility  for  the  sanc- 
tuary, that  it  should  harbor  nothing  "disloyal." 
As  Amaziah  was  true  to  his  type,  so  Amos  shows 
himself  the  true  prophet  in  his  simple  but  genuine 
reply,  when,  disclaiming  any  professional  author- 
ity, he  says:  "Jehovah  took  me  from  following 
the  flock,  and  Jehovah  said  unto  me,  Go,  prophesy 
unto  my  people  Israel." 

Twenty-five  centuries  have  passed  by  since  the 
days  of  Amos,  and  the  scale  of  things  has  changed. 
Our  political  horizon  has  widened  and  its  units 
are  no  longer  petty  states  in  a  restricted  corner  of 
Asia,  but  great  modern  nations  and  alliances  em- 
bracing large  sectors  of  the  world.  The  guerilla 
warfare  of  the  toy  kingdoms  of  Jeroboam  and  the 
house  of  Ben-hadad  has  given  place  to  the  Great 
War,  and  the  outrages  have  been  organized,  mul- 
tiplied, and  extended.  Air  raids  and  starvation 
blockades  merely  enlarge  the  scope  of  operations 
of  the  iron  flails  of  Syria  and  the  swords  of  the 
children  of  Ammon.  Industrial  life  has  also 
changed  its  scale,  and  its  abuses  also  have  become 
organized  and  extended.  Exploitation,  graft,  eco- 
nomic monopolies  and  injustice  have  become 
wholesale  rather  than  individual,  in  corporations 
as  well  as  in  men,  and  in  well-defined  classes  of 
society. 


110  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

But  many  things  have  not  changed  with  the 
years  and  the  earliest  recorded  sermon  of  history 
must  be  preached  again  to-day.  In  international 
affairs  the  same  lust  of  conquest,  the  same  relent- 
less vengeance  to  the  bitter  end,  the  same  cold 
cruelty  in  the  name  of  military  necessity  and 
national  interest,  continue,  and  in  the  social  life — 
greed,  oppression,  luxury,  and  indifference  to  the 
interests  of  the  poor.  Nations  still  gladly  con- 
demn in  other  nations  what  they  condone  in  their 
own  history  or  in  their  allies.  They  forget  the 
two  equations  of  Amos — the  equality  of  moral 
responsibility  for  all  nations  in  the  sight  of  God, 
and  the  equivalence  of  economic  and  industrial 
injustice  to  the  atrocities  of  war. 

And  organized  religion  is  still  often  merely  the 
ally  of  the  government  and  of  the  industrial  status 
quo,  more  concerned  to  serve  Caesar  and  Mammon 
than  to  render  "unto  God  the  things  that  are 
God's."  It  still  shelters  the  self-satisfied,  com- 
fortable classes  "who  are  at  ease  in  Zion,"  but 
"are  not  grieved  for  the  affliction  of  Joseph/' 
while  it  strives  to  silence  moral  criticism  or  to 
exile  into  obscurity  as  traitors  the  God-sent 
prophets  who  compare  injustice  within  a  nation 
to  the  universally  condemned  sins  of  its  foes. 


XII 

LOYALTY,   A   NATIONAL  MOTIVE 

As  one  studies  the  prophets  of  Israel  in  the 
light  of  modern  times,  two  facts  seem  to  emerge 
more  clearly  than  ever  before:  First,  that  these 
men  are  speaking  to  a  nation  rather  than  to  per- 
sons; and,  second,  that  each  of  them  has  a  distinc- 
tive mission  and  message. 

The  prophet  Hosea  illustrates  these  statements. 
For  Hosea  the  nation  is  the  object  of  concern. 
Ephraim  is  a  unit  and  can  be  described  as  a  whole 
by  a  single  designation.  Its  social  and  religious 
conditions  are  national  problems.  Like  many 
other  prophets,  Hosea  deals  directly  with  the  po- 
litical questions  of  his  day — the  chaotic  govern- 
ment, the  inadequate  public  leadership,  the  futile 
chauvinism  and  fickle  diplomacy  that  marked  the 
decadence  of  the  Hebrew  monarchies.  On  the 
other  hand,  in  spite  of  the  variety  of  his  accusa- 
tions and  the  extreme  obscurity  of  his  literary 
remains  Hosea  evidently  had  a  special  message. 
Living  as  he  did  a  few  years  after  Amos,  and 
dealing  with  conditions  but  slightly  changed,  he 
forms  in  many  ways  the  most  striking  contrast 
with  the  shepherd  of  Tekoa.  He  is  also  distinct 
from  Judean  prophets  who  followed.  It  is  true 
that  in  many  elements  of  his  message  there  is 
ill 


112  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

nothing  unique.  His  themes  include  all  the  com- 
monplaces of  prophecy.  Many  of  them  are  more 
clearly  elaborated  by  others.  The  distinctive 
thing  about  Hosea,  among  the  great  national 
idealists  of  Israel,  is  neither  in  his  diagnosis  of 
the  nation's  faults,  nor  in  his  certainty  of  its 
doom,  nor  even,  as  has  been  often  thought,  in  his 
hopefulness  of  its  repentance.  It  is,  rather,  the 
motive  to  which  he  appeals  in  his  plea  for  national 
reform,  and  the  analogy  by  which  he  makes  his 
motive  clear. 

Why,  then,  does  Hosea  challenge  the  nation  to 
repent?  Is  it  for  the  fear  of  just  punishment  as 
in  Amos?  Yes,  Hosea  threatens  punishment, 
though  it  is  doubtful  whether  he  thought  that 
punishment  could  be  averted.  Is  it  for  hope  of 
reward  ?  Yes,  but  the  promises  of  restoration  are 
no  more  vivid  or  authentic  in  Hosea  than  in  some 
at  least  of  the  other  prophets.  No,  the  appeal  of 
Hosea  beyond  these  common  and  somewhat  mer- 
cenary motives  is  the  appeal  to  national  loyalty. 
This  is  not  the  loyalty  of  the  citizen  to  the  state, 
nor  of  the  state  to  its  own  self-interest,  but  the 
loyalty  of  the  whole  nation  to  what  might  be 
expected  of  it  from  the  highest  outside  moral 
view-point.  In  religious  terms  Hosea' s  appeal 
was  for  a  response  to  the  love  of  God. 

On  its  religious  side  the  emphasis  of  Hosea  upon 
love  has  long  been  recognized.  The  fact  is  fa- 
miliar to  theologians  that,  as  Amos  had  taught 


LOYALTY  113 

the  impartial  justice  of  God,  Hosea  manifested 
his  persistent  love.  Hosea,  therefore,  anticipates 
the  gracious  good  news  of  the  greater  Galilean. 
He  discloses  the  sorrow  of  God's  loving  heart  over 
the  waywardness  of  his  prodigal  child,  Israel,  and 
his  love  that  "never  faileth"  nor  lets  go. 

"How  shall  I  give  thee  up,  Ephraim? 
How  shall  I  cast  thee  off,  Israel  ? 
How  shall  I  make  thee  as  Admah  ? 
How  shall  I  set  thee  as  Zeboiim  ? 
My  heart  is  turned  within  me, 
My  compassions  are  kindled  together. 
I  will  not  execute  the  fierceness  of  mine  anger, 
I  will  not  return  to  destroy  Ephraim: 
For  I  am  God,  and  not  man; 
The  Holy  One  in  the  midst  of  thee; 
And  I  will  not  come  in  wrath  (11:8,  9)." 

Such  love  is  the  superhuman  trait  of  the  divine. 
The  distinction  between  God  and  man  is  in  lov- 
ing-kindness and  tender  mercies. 

This  love  of  God  for  Israel  is  beautifully  por- 
trayed in  the  poet's  memories  of  Israel's  past. 
History  is  the  gracious  story  of  divine  redemp- 
tion. The  nation  is  the  living  epistle,  the  monu- 
ment of  God's  care  surpassing  his  care  for  the 
birds  and  the  flowers  of  Galilee.  "In  a  series  of 
lovely  images  Hosea  pictures  the  beauty  of  Israel's 
childhood  and  youth.  As  'grapes  in  the  wilder- 
ness' Jehovah  had  found  them;  as  'first  ripe 
figs'  He  saw  their  fathers.  ...  As  a  flock  of 


114  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

docile  sheep  He  'tended'  her  in  the  desert, 
'through  a  land  of  burning  drought/  Even  as 
a  son  He  loved  her,  and  called  her  unto  Him 
from  Egypt,  took  her  in  His  arms,  and  healed  her 
little  sores,  taught  her  to  walk  and  drew  her  on 
'with  leading-strings  of  love/"  l  But  Israel  had 
not  responded  to  this  love.  Like  a  faithless  wife 
she  had  followed  other  lovers,  and  had  forsaken 
her  own  God. 

But  the  love  of  God  for  Israel  was  revealed  to 
Hosea  even  more  clearly  in  a  personal  experience. 
His  wife,  whom  he  loved,  had  proved  unfaithful 
to  him.  Her  children  were  not  his  children: 
Loammi,  "no  kin  of  mine,"  he  calls  one  of  them. 
She  strayed  away  from  him  until  she  fell  into 
slavery.  But  Hosea  found  in  himself  an  impulse, 
which  seemed  to  him  like  a  call  to  God,  still  to 
love  this  woman.  He  redeemed  her  from  slavery, 
and  appealed  to  her  again  with  the  wooing  love 
of  their  first  romance.  All  this  was  a  lesson  of 
the  sorrow  and  love  of  God.  By  a  device  not 
uncommon  in  the  Semitic  world  the  nation  is  per- 
sonified. It  carries  a  man's  name,  like  Israel, 
Ephraim,  or  Jacob.  Its  history  is  like  a  biogra- 
phy. Its  relation  to  God  is  described,  as  in  all  reli- 
gion, in  human  analogies.  Many  personal  met- 
aphors are  used.  God  is  the  nation's  king  (melek), 
its  uncle,  its  father,  its  husband  (baal).  The  na- 
tion is  his  servant,  his  son,  or  his  bride.  All  these 
1  Gordon,  The  Prophets  of  Israel,  pp.  70 /. 


LOYALTY  115 

occur  in  the  Old  Testament.  Hosea,  as  we  have 
already  seen,  spoke  of  Israel  as  the  son  of  God. 
But  it  is  the  last  figure  that  suits  best  his  own 
emotion  and  experience. 

The  idea  of  a  nation  as  her  god's  bride  was  a 
natural  one  among  the  Semites,  but  it  was  a 
metaphor  peculiarly  fraught  with  dangers.  For 
not  all  human  relations  are  ideal,  and  only  the 
more  spiritual  ones  are  fit  expressions  of  the 
divine. 

By  the  neighbors  of  Israel  the  marriage  of  a  god  to 
his  people  was  conceived  with  a  grossness  of  feeling 
and  illustrated  by  a  foulness  of  ritual  which  thoroughly 
demoralized  the  people,  affording,  as  they  did,  to  licen- 
tiousness the  example  and  sanction  of  religion.  So 
debased  had  the  idea  become,  and  so  full  of  temptation 
to  the  Hebrews  were  the  forms  in  which  it  was  illus- 
trated among  their  neighbors,  that  the  religion  of 
Israel  might  justly  have  been  praised  for  achieving  a 
great  moral  victory  in  excluding  the  figure  altogether 
from  its  system.  But  the  prophets  of  Jehovah  dared 
the  heavier  task  of  retaining  the  idea  of  religious  mar- 
riage, and  won  the  diviner  triumph  of  purifying  and 
elevating  it.  It  was,  indeed,  a  new  creation.  Every 
physical  suggestion  was  banished,  and  the  relation  was 
conceived  as  purely  moral.  Yet  it  was  never  refined 
to  a  mere  form  or  abstraction.  The  prophets  fear- 
lessly expressed  it  in  the  wannest  and  most  familiar 
terms  of  the  love  of  man  and  woman.1 

This  assertion  applies  pre-eminently  to  Hosea, 
for  the  metaphor  came  from  his  own  heart,  with 
1 G.  A.  Smith,  The  Book  of  Isaiah,  II,  p.  399. 


116  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

its  pure,  yearning,  unsatisfied  affection.     God's 
words  to  Israel  are  like  a  love-song: 

"Therefore,  lo!  I  will  allure  her, 

And  will  lead  her  to  the  desert,  and  will  speak  to 

her  heart; 
And  I  will  give  her  back  her  vineyards, 

And  will  make  the  valley  of  Achor  a  door  of  hope. 
And  she  shall  respond  to  me  there  as  in  the  days  of 

her  youth, 
Even  the  day  that  I  brought  her  up  from  the  land 

of  Egypt; 

And  I  will  betroth  her  to  me  in  love  and  com- 
passion, 

And  I  will  betroth  her  to  me  in  truth  and  the  knowl- 
edge of  Jehovah  (2:14-17,  Gordon). 

Such  is  Hosea's  message  that  "God  is  love." 
And  yet  his  purpose  is  not  simply  the  revelation 
of  God,  and  our  interest  in  the  Godlike  sufferings 
of  Hosea  or  in  the  nature  of  God  must  not  obscure 
the  fact  that  Hosea's  purpose  was  an  appeal  to 
the  nation.  The  question  is  not,  How  does  God 
feel?  but,  What  is  the  nation's  response?  The 
Book  of  Hosea  is  a  supreme  challenge  to  the  higher 
ideals  of  his  people  in  the  light  of  the  love  of  God. 
It  is  to  awaken  them  to  the  moral  implications  of 
their  history  and  to  the  compelling  power  of 
noble  ideals  which  are  comparable  to  the  pursuant 
love  of  a  true  lover.  And  here,  as  elsewhere,  the 
comparison  with  Amos  is  obvious.  Amos  had 
spoken  of  God's  justice,  and  had  demanded  jus- 


LOYALTY  117 

tice  among  men  and  nations.  Hosea  declared 
God's  love — "leal  love"  is  the  Scotch  translation 
of  the  characteristic  word  of  Hosea — and  aroused 
the  nation  to  the  response  of  loyalty.  Amos  ap- 
pealed to  the  reason,  Hosea  to  the  heart;  Amos 
to  the  law  of  cause  and  effect,  Hosea  to  the  sen- 
timent of  gratitude.  Both  attributes  of  God  are 
true,  both  appeals  to  men  are  important.  But  as 
a  motive  for  national  action,  as  a  demand  for  sheer 
loyalty  and  gratitude,  for  fidelity  to  that  which 
is  neither  selfish  gain  nor  fear,  but  the  highest 
ideals  with  their  persistent  and  wooing  influence, 
Hosea's  message  is  the  more  unusual.  It  is  a 
kind  of  national  "noblesse  oblige,"  the  duty  of  a 
state  to  do  what  is  expected  of  it,  not  by  mere 
justice,  or  law,  or  self-interest,  but  by  the  highest 
standards  within  or  without;  it  is  the  irresistible 
urge,  like  the  moral  impulse,  which  thrills  the 
heart  that  is  the  object  of  the  most  spiritual  love 
— call  it  God,  or  national  conscience,  or  humanity, 
or  "loyalty  to  loyalty,"  whichever  you  like. 

So  interpreted,  Hosea  has  surely  a  significant 
message  for  to-day.  Both  his  analogy  and  his 
motive  are  needed  by  the  modern  nations.  "  We 
are  at  the  beginning  of  an  age,"  President  Wilson 
is  reported  to  have  said,  "in  which  it  will  be  in- 
sisted that  the  same  standards  of  conduct  and 
responsibility  for  wrong  done  shall  be  observed 
among  nations  that  are  observed  among  individ- 
uals of  civilized  states."  At  least  as  a  standard 


118  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

of  law  the  personal  analogy  is  coming  to  have  a 
place  in  statecraft.  Political  and  military  acts 
will  be  viewed  in  the  light  of  reason  and  equity, 
like  the  acts  of  individuals.  But  many  of  us  are 
limiting  the  analogy  to  cold  reason  and  blind  jus- 
tice. A  further  step  must  follow  as  Hosea  fol- 
lowed Amos.  Justice  must  be  supplemented  by 
mercy,  law  by  love,  reason  by  affection.  In  tjie 
new  international  relationships  the  analogy  not 
merely  of  the  law  court  but  of  the  family  must 
be  adopted,  and  all  the  highest  sentiments  of 
loyalty,  gratitude,  and  leal  love  must  supplant 
the  adulterous  and  idolatrous  waywardness  in 
the  nations'  hearts.  Loyalty  as  a  term  must  be 
redeemed  from  that  recent  abuse  of  enforced  con- 
formity to  government  policy.  It  must  mean 
not  the  loyalty  of  citizens  to  the  state,  nor  of  the 
state  to  its  citizens,  but  the  united  fidelity  of 
both  to  the  highest  national  ideals.  Like  the 
response  of  the  betrothed  to  the  very  love  of  God, 
it  must  shame  and  allure  and  inspire  nations  from 
self-regarding,  ingrate  materialism  to  mutual  con- 
sideration and  service.  International  law  must 
be  transformed  into  international  love,  and  the 
familiar  twofold  summary  of  personal  duty  must 
become  the  domestic  and  foreign  policy  of  the 
state:  "Thou  shalt  love  the  Lord  thy  God,  and 
thy  neighbor  as  thyself." 


XIII 

THE  PROPHET  AND  POLITICS 

THE  relation  of  the  early  Hebrew  prophets  to 
contemporary  politics  is  a  subject  regarding 
which  Bible  students  have  passed  from  one  ex- 
treme view  to  another.  The  older  idea  of  proph- 
ecy as  a  merely  predictive  function,  without  any 
relation  to  current  affairs,  has  been  entirely  dis- 
credited. But  any  alternative  view  which  makes 
of  these  great  leaders  mere  time-servers  and  poli- 
ticians, concerned  only  with  the  passing  political 
scene,  is  equally  erroneous.  They  were  surely 
men  of  their  own  age,  and  deeply  concerned  with 
everything  that  affected  the  welfare  of  their 
nation. 

But  the  real  significance  of  the  prophets  is  not 
in  their  participation  in  political  life,  but  their 
aloofness  from  it.  Like  Jesus  at  a  later  time, 
they  displayed  an  indifference  to  partisan  feeling 
which  must  have  been  annoying  to  their  contem- 
poraries. They  apparently  suffered  the  usual 
fate  of  neutrals  in  being  disliked  by  both  .sides. 
But,  in  spite  of  the  personal  sufferings  to  which 
they  were  thus  exposed,  their  position  gave  them 
an  opportunity  to  see  life  steadily  and  see  it 
whole.  They  were  aware  of  the  lessons  of  his- 
tory while  history  was  in  the  making,  and  even 

119 


120  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

amid  the  din  of  battle  and  confusion  of  political 
strife  they  had  faith  in  the  guiding  hand  at  the 
helm.  With  the  prophet  of  the  beleaguered 
Samaria  their  prayer  to  God  and  the  purpose  of 
their  own  efforts  was  to  open  the  eyes  that  could 
not  see  beyond  the  present  and  the  material  to 
behold  the  future  and  the  spiritual. 

The  best  illustration  of  the  relation  of  the 
prophets  to  politics  is  Isaiah  ben  Amoz.  For- 
merly he  was  thought  of  only  as  the  evangelist 
of  the  Old  Testament;  now  he  is  called  the  states- 
man among  the  prophets.  Certainly  the  book 
that  bears  his  name,  in  spite  of  confusions  of 
order  and  interpolations,  gives  us  a  picture  of 
most  varied  and  difficult  international  problems 
amid  which  Isaiah  and  the  kings  of  Judah  lived. 
Isaiah's  words  of  political  import  are  clustered 
about  a  series  of  national  crises  covering  a  period 
of  perhaps  forty  years,  and  can  best  be  studied 
in  connection  with  the  events  of  the  time.  Brief 
references  to  these  circumstances  must  suffice  us 
here. 

In  the  closing  part  of  the  eighth  century  the 
Assyrian  Empire  was  making  itself  felt  in  south- 
western Asia  as  never  before.  Nominal  sov- 
ereignty it  had  for  long  held  over  some  of  the 
petty  states.  Israel,  for  example,  had  paid  trib- 
ute to  Assyria  and  sent  soldiers  to  fight  in  the 
Assyrian  army  one  hundred  years  before.  In 
earlier  centuries  frequent  visits  of  Assyrian 


PROPHET  AND  POLITICS  121 

armies  to  the  west  are  mentioned  on  the  inscrip- 
tions. But  now  Tiglath-pileser,  Sargon,  and 
Sennacherib  sought  to  make  their  rule  more  per- 
manent and  solid.  Conquest  was  made  easy  by 
the  lack  of  unity  between  the  petty  states,  whose 
mutual  jealousies  prevented  effective  combined 
resistance.  But  conquests  once  made  were  not 
easily  conserved,  because  of  their  distance  from 
the  seat  of  military  and  political  control,  and  be- 
cause of  civil  wars  or  revolts  in  other  quarters 
which,  from  time  to  time,  weakened  the  Assyrian 
authority  in  the  west.  The  whole  history  of 
Judah  and  its  neighbors  during  Isaiah's  lifetime 
may  be  summed  up  as  a  series  of  revolts  against 
Assyria  and  reconquests  by  the  Assyrian  kings. 
The  earliest  political  crisis  referred  to  in  Isaiah's 
career  is  in  chapter  7.  The  date  is  about  734  B.  c. 
Israel  and  Syria  (Damascus),  after  a  hundred 
years  of  war  and  commercial  rivalry,  have  set- 
tled their  differences  to  make  a  defensive  alli- 
ance against  the  common  foe,  Assyria.  Their 
kings,  Pekah  and  Rezin,  appear  at  the  walls  of 
Jerusalem,  intending  to  force  their  neighbor  to 
break  its  fealty  to  Nineveh  as  a  vassal  state  and 
to  join  the  anti-Assyrian  coalition.  If  persuasion 
will  not  succeed  they  will  fight;  if  immediate  cap- 
ture is  impossible  they  will  lay  siege,  and  when 
they  have  entered  the  city  they  will  replace  King 
Ahaz  by  an  appointee  of  their  own.  It  is  natural 
that  the  heart  of  the  king  should  tremble  "and 


122  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

the  heart  of  his  people,  as  the  trees  of  the  forest 
tremble  with  the  wind."  Isaiah  finds  King  Ahaz 
"at  the  end  of  the  conduit  of  the  upper  pool," 
no  doubt  inspecting  the  water-supply,  which  was 
the  critical  point  in  the  city's  preparedness  for 
siege.  His  words  are  words  of  calm: 

"Take  heed,  and  be  quiet; 
Fear  not,  neither  let  thy  heart  be  faint, 
Because  of  these  two  tails  of  smoking  firebrands. . . . 
If  ye  will  not  believe, 
Surely  ye  shall  not  be  established"  (7:4,  9). 

This  early  incident  in  Isaiah's  career  is  typical 
of  all  we  know  of  him.  With  a  play  on  words 
that  is  not  translatable  he  declares  that  faith  is 
the  one  requisite  of  national  security.  This  does 
not  mean  that  Isaiah  was  sure  of  Judah's  political 
or  material  success.  In  predicting  the  speedy 
downfall  of  her  present  foes — a  prediction  for 
which  he  later  gives  the  king  a  definite  sign  and 
a  date  within  sixty-five  years,  or  even  less — Isaiah 
does  not  promise  permanent  immunity  for  his 
own  country;  its  doom  also  is  threatened.  It  is 
becoming  increasingly  doubtful  whether  Isaiah 
ever  declared  the  inviolability  of  Zion  in  the 
sense  which  has  sometimes  been  ascribed  to  him. 
Nor  later,  when  Assyria's  power  is  exalted  as  the 
assured  victor  over  all  its  foes,  and  the  rod  of 
Jehovah's  anger  in  punishing  the  nations,  are  we 
to  assume  that  Isaiah  meant  to  imply  permanent 


PROPHET  AND  POLITICS  123 

success  to  Assyria  and  utter  defeat  to  Judah  and 
Egypt.  Assyria,  too,  shall  be  brought  low;  the 
virgin  daughter  of  Zion  shall  laugh  it  to  scorn: 
while  Judah  shall  not  perish  forever  from  the 
earth;  a  remnant  shall  return. 

The  predictions  of  Isaiah,  therefore — his  prom- 
ises of  blessing  or  threats  of  disaster — must  not 
be  understood  as  mere  worldly  wisdom,  the 
shrewd  conjectures  of  a  skillful  forecaster  of  the 
stormy  political  weather  of  southwestern  Asia. 
They  are,  rather,  the  expression  of  religious  stand- 
ards in  national  life.  Isaiah  does  not  weigh 
specific  policies  for  special  occasions;  he  expresses 
the  fundamental  spirit  that  policies  must  em- 
body. When  he  opposes  in  Judah  the  panic  for 
preparedness,  the  drifting  into  entangling  alli- 
ances, or  the  cowardly  fear  of  capture,  quite  as 
much  as  when  he  scorns  the  ruthless  imperialism 
of  Assyria  or  the  military  impotence  of  Egyptian 
allies,  Isaiah  is  not  merely  giving  advice;  he  is 
dealing  with  moral  values.  The  prophet  is  no 
political  doctrinaire;  he  is  neither  an  opportunist 
nor  the  consistent  advocate  of  a  particular  politi- 
cal formula.  But  amid  all  his  words  there  runs 
one  thread  that  gives  unity  transcending  politics 
— the  unity  of  faith  in  God. 

This  faith  of  Isaiah  must  also  be  distinguished 
from  fatalism.  There  is  an  absolute  difference 
between  them.  For  while  Isaiah  believes  that 
God  controls  history,  his  assurance  is  not  so 


124  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

much  in  the  details  of  God's  intended  acts  as  in 
the  moral  principles  of  his  action.  The  divine 
favor  is  not  with  the  powerful  or  the  prosperous, 
but  with  the  righteous  and  the  upright.  It  is 
moral,  not  material,  preparedness  that  Isaiah  ad- 
vocates; reliance  on  God,  not  alliance  with  men. 
God  is  not  with  the  strongest  battalions,  but 
with  those  who  trust  in  him.  He  can  save  by 
many  or  by  few,  and  one  with  God  is  a  majority. 
Fatalism,  in  the  real  sense  of  the  word,  Isaiah 
condemns,  the  fatalism  that  believes  that  char- 
acter does  not  count.  It  may  be  optimism,  as  of 
men  who  say: 

"  We  have  made  a  covenant  with  death, 
And  with  Sheol  are  we  at  agreement; 
When  the  overflowing  scourge  shall  pass  through, 
It  shall  not  come  unto  us"  (28:15). 

It  may  be  pessimism  of  those  who  cry: 

"  Let  us  eat  and  drink,  for  to-morrow  we  die"  (22:13). 

But  in  either  case  the  need  is  the  same — faith, 
the  foundation  stone,  and  righteousness,  the 
builder's  plummet. 

This  principle  of  faith  in  God  is  the  basis  of  all 
Isaiah's  national  and  international  teaching.  In 
the  first  place,  it  explains  his  emphasis  on  moral 
character.  Even  amid  serious  political  and  mili- 
tary crises,  when  general  moral  teaching  seems 
so  out  of  place,  and  the  insistence  on  fundamen- 
tals of  national  virtue  are  ridiculed  as  the  monot- 


PROPHET  AND  POLITICS  125 

onous  "line  upon  line,  precept  upon  precept"  of 
the  elementary  pedagogue,  Isaiah  asserts  that 
the  foundations  of  national  life  are  a  righteous 
government.  Faith  in  God  is  neither  theology 
nor  ritual,  but  the  practice  of  social  justice.  In 
the  opening  chapter  of  our  present  collection  of 
Isaiah's  sermons  the  prophet  declares  the  hollow- 
ness  and  futility  of  the  sacrifices,  feasts,  and  sab- 
baths because  of  the  blood-stained  hands  and 
sinful  hearts  of  the  worshippers.  He  calls  the 
rulers  and  people  of  Judah  chieftains  of  Sodom 
and  people  of  Gomorrah.  And  in  order  to  escape 
the  fate  of  those  ill-starred  cities  he  summons 
them  to  national  repentance  and  conversion. 

"Cease  to  do  evil;  learn  to  do  well; 
Seek  justice,  relieve  the  oppressed, 
Judge  the  fatherless,  plead  for  the  widow. 
Come  now,  and  let  us  reason  together,  saith  Jehovah: 
Though  your  sins  be  as  scarlet,  they  shall  be  as  white 

as  snow; 

Though  they  be  red  like  crimson,  they  shall  be  as 
wool"  (1:16-18). 

In  the  second  place,  Isaiah's  principle  of  faith 
and  its  moral  emphasis  explains  his  attitude  to 
the  nationalism  of  his  time.  Not  so  explicitly  as 
other  prophets,  but  with  no  less  reality,  Isaiah 
escapes  the  particularism  of  the  Jehovah  religion. 
"The  Holy  One  of  Israel/'  as  he  still  calls  him,  is 
too  pure  to  behold  with  favor  iniquity  even  in 
his  own  nation.  Zion  can  expect  no  better  fate 
than  has  recently  befallen  Samaria  and  Damas- 


126  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

cus,  or  in  the  olden  time  befell  the  wicked  "  cities 
of  the  plain."  Even  Assyria  and  Egypt  are  in 
God's  hand  to  exalt  and  to  bring  low.  Before 
him  are  their  rising  up  and  their  lying  down, 
their  going  out  and  their  coming  in.  But  God 
will  not  only  apply  to  Israel  this  strict  justice 
which  he  applies  to  others:  he  will  grant  to  the 
other  nations  the  same  favors  as  to  his  own.  As 
later  a  Christian  teacher  perceived  "that  God  is 
no  respecter  of  persons:  but  in  every  nation  he 
that  feareth  him  and  worketh  righteousness  is 
acceptable  to  him,"  so  the  earlier  prophets  looked 
forward  to  the  time  when  the  knowledge  of  Jeho- 
vah should  cover  the  earth  as  the  waters  cover 
the  sea.  "  In  that  day,"  says  the  Isaianic  passage, 
"shall  Israel  be  the  third  with  Egypt  and  with 
Assyria,  a  blessing  in  the  midst  of  the  earth;  for 
that  Jehovah  of  hosts  hath  blessed  them,  saying: 
Blessed  be  Egypt  my  people,  and  Assyria  the 
work  of  my  hands,  and  Israel  mine  inheritance."1 

In  the  third  place,  this  principle  of  faith  ex- 
plains Isaiah's  attitude  toward  political  machina- 
tions of  coalition  and  diplomacy.  The  clever 
schemers  are  ridiculous  in  the  sight  of  God,  for  as 
Isaiah  sarcastically  remarks,  "Jehovah  also  is 
wise,"  and  in  leaving  him  out  of  account  and  his 
moral  requirements  they  heap  sin  upon  sin. 

In  the  fourth  place,  it  explains  his  emphasis 
upon  quietness.  "He  that  believeth  shall  not 
1 19:24,  25. 


PROPHET  AND  POLITICS  127 

be  in  haste."  For  those  who  trust  in  God  excite- 
ment and  panic  are  of  no  avail;  it  is  only  moral 
qualities  that  count. 

"In  returning  and  rest  shall  ye  be  saved; 
In  quietness  and  in  confidence  shall  be  your  strength" 

(30:15). 

"And  the  work  of  righteousness  shall  be  peace; 
And  the  effect  of  righteousness,  quietness  and  con- 
fidence forever"  (32:17). 

In  the  fifth  place,  it  explains  his  attitude  toward 
military  endeavor  and  military  fear.  He  rebukes 
in  the  most  scathing  terms  the  brute  violence  of 
the  Assyrian  lords  and  their  conceit  in  their  con- 
quests; but  at  the  same  time  he  rebukes  the  little 
Judah  that  quails  before  the  powerful  military 
machine.  Both  nations  are  wanting  in  faith  in 
God.  Their  respective  faults,  as  Professor  Smith 
has  finely  expressed  them,  are  the  atheism  of 
force  and  the  atheism  of  fear.  To  the  timid, 
faith  in  God  gives  assurance  because  they  fear 
not  him  that  kills  the  body.  To  the  arrogant 
victor,  faith  is  a  reminder  of  the  real  sovereignty 
of  God.1  Faith  in  militarism,  on  the  one  hand, 
and  fear  of  militarism,  on  the  other,  are  equally 
condemned  when  one  realizes  that  only  righteous- 
ness exalts  a  nation  and  that  mankind  endures  or 
progresses  not  by  military  or  economic  success, 
but  by  purely  spiritual  values. 

1  Contrast  8:12,  13  with  10:15. 


XIV 

THE  LIMITATIONS  OF  STATECRAFT 

AT  the  crisis  of  the  attempted  Syro-Ephraimite 
intervention,  described  in  the  preceding  chapter, 
Ahaz  rejected  the  policy  of  neutrality  and  "watch- 
ful waiting"  wfiich  Isaiah  urged  upon  him.  But 
Isaiah's  words  about  the  two  meddling  kings 
proved  true.  As  he  had  said,  in  less  time  than 
it  takes  for  a  child  to  be  born  and  to  grow  old 
enough  to  cry  "my  father"  or  "my  mother,"  or 
to  distinguish  the  evil  from  the  good,  the  riches 
of  Damascus  and  the  spoil  of  Samaria  were  car- 
ried away  before  the  king  of  Assyria.1  Damascus 
was  taken  and  destroyed  (732  B.  c.) ;  of  Israel  the 
large  outlying  fertile  territories  were  lost  even 
before  that  year,  and  with  the  siege  and  capture 
of  the  city  of  Samaria  in  722-1  and  the  deporta- 
tion of  its  leading  citizens,  the  Kingdom  of  Israel, 
or  Ephraim,  ended.  But  in  other  parts  of  Pales- 
tine the  same  restlessness  continued.  With  every 
favorable  opportunity  coalitions  were  formed  to 
throw  off  the  Assyrian  yoke.  Once  a  powerful 
revolutionary  state  in  Babylon,  under  Merodach- 
Baladan,  became  the  leader  and  hope  of  local 
independence.  But  this  uprising  was  suppressed. 
More  often  Egypt  was  the  stalking-horse  of  Assyr- 

1  Isaiah  8:4;  cf.  7:14-16. 

128 


LIMITATIONS  OF  STATECRAFT  129 

ian  rivalry,  a  great  nation  of  immense  resources, 
full  of  promises  of  help,  but  a  feeble  reed  to  lean 
upon.  How  he  put  down  such  a  coalition  in  the 
early  part  of  his  reign  is  vividly  described  by  Sen- 
nacherib himself,  in  his  annals.  The  death  of 
his  predecessor  was  apparently  the  signal  for  a 
general  rebellion.  Merodach-Baladan  reappeared 
and  instigated  a  successful  revolt  in  Babylonia; 
in  Palestine  the  states  of  Tyre,  Judah,  Edom, 
Moab,  Ammon  united  in  an  alliance  against 
Assyria  and  secured  the  promise  of  help  from 
Egypt.  One  by  one  the  enemies  of  Sennacherib 
were  defeated  or  frightened  into  submission.  In 
702  B.  c.  Merodach-Baladan  was  beaten  in  battle 
and  put  to  flight  before  the  forces  of  the  Emperor, 
who  then  turned  to  the  West.  The  towns  along 
the  coast  surrendered  and  Lull,  King  of  Tyre, 
fled.  In  southern  Palestine  Sennacherib  met  and 
defeated  an  Egyptian  army.  Ekron  and  Lachish 
were  besieged  and  captured.  The  kingdoms  of 
Edom,  Moab,  and  Ammon  submitted.  Judah, 
remaining  defiant,  was  severely  treated.  As  Sen- 
nacherib himself  declares: 

Of  Hezekiah,  the  Judean,  who  had  not  submitted  to 
my  yoke,  forty-six  strong  cities,  with  walls,  the  smaller 
cities  without  number,  by  the  battering  of  rams  and 
the  assault  of  engines,  the  attack  of  foot  soldiers,  mines, 
breaches  and  axes,  I  besieged  and  captured.  Two 
hundred  thousand  one  hundred  and  fifty  men,  young, 
old,  male,  female,  horses,  mules,  asses,  camels,  oxen, 


130  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

and  sheep  without  number  I  brought  out  from  them 
and  counted  as  booty.  [Hezekiah]  himself  I  shut  up 
like  a  caged  bird  within  Jerusalem,  his  royal  city.1 

There  are  many  passages  in  Isaiah's  writings 
that  reveal  his  reaction  to  these  circumstances. 
Against  the  constant  tendency  to  reliance  on 
Egypt  he  objects  by  word  and  symbol.2 

The  dominant  note  here  as  elsewhere  is  the 
prophet's  sense  of  the  limitations  of  statecraft. 
Three  principal  limitations  are  manifest  in  the 
national  policies  of  Hezekiah  or  those  who  con- 
trolled. One  is  the  tendency  to  neglect  God  as 
a  factor  in  international  relationships.  It  is  in 
Isaiah's  opposition  to  Eygptian  alliance  that  the 
religious  reasons  for  his  political  advice  most 
clearly  appear.  Perhaps  Isaiah  appreciated  more 
fully  than  his  contemporaries  the  invincibility  of 
the  Assyrian  wolf,  and  the  military  impotence  of 
Egypt,  and  of  the  loose  coalition  that  sought 
refuge  in  her  shadow.  There  is  something  quaint 
in  the  Judean's  horror  of  "the  land  of  the  rustling 
of  wings,"  that  unknown  southland  with  monsters 
as  fabulous  as  its  wealth.3  But  Isaiah's  chief  ob- 
jection to  the  intriguers  is  that  their  political 
schemes  are  made  without  consulting  God,  in 
defiance  of  his  will,  and  without  estimating  the 

1  The  so-called  Taylor  Cylinder  (translation  from  Rogers, 
Cuneiform  Parallel*  to  the  Old  Testament,  pp.  343  /.). 
9  Isaiah  20;  30:1-7;  31:1-3. 
'Isaiah  18:1;  30:6. 


LIMITATIONS  OF  STATECRAFT  131 

comparative  importance  of  his  demands.  Egypt 
thus  becomes  the  foil  of  Jehovah.  In  a  manner 
characteristic  of  the  religious  teachers  of  Israel 
Isaiah  calls  attention  to  the  contrast  between 
material  and  spiritual  reliance.  Foreign  alliances, 
large  financial  supplies,  extensive  military  equip- 
ment are  listed  with  crass  idolatry.1  The  Egyp- 
tian cavalry,  both  horses  and  men,  are  only 
flesh,  not  spirit,  like  God.  When  security  was 
to  be  found  "in  quietness  and  in  confidence/' 
they  said, 

"No,  for  we  will  flee  upon  horses  .  .  . 
We  will  ride  upon  the  swift." 

But  all  those  wno  "  trust  in  chariots  because  they 
are  many  and  horsemen  because  they  are  strong/' 
"look  not  unto  the  Holy  One  of  Israel,  neither 
seek  Jehovah."  The  same  forgetfulness  had  char- 
acterized all  their  preparations  for  war  in  the 
day  that  men  looked  "to  the  armor  in  the  house 
of  the  forest."  As  Isaiah  complains: 

"Ye  gathered  together  the  waters  of  the  lower  poof; 
And  ye  numbered  the  houses  of  Jerusalem, 
And  ye  brake  down  the  houses  to  fortify  the  wall. 
Ye  made  also  a  reservoir  between  the  two  walls  for 

the  water  of  the  old  pool: 
But  ye  looked  not  unto  him  that  had  done  this, 
Neither  had  ye  respect  unto  him  that  purposed  it 

long  ago "(22:9-11). 

i  Isaiah  2:6-8. 


132  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

Quite  as  well  to  the  ancient  militarists  of  Judah 
as  to  the  more  extended  modern  imperium  could 
be  applied  the  prayer  of  Kipling's  "Reccessional": 

"  For  heathen  heart  that  puts  her  trust 

In  reeking  tube  and  iron  shard — 
All  valiant  dust  that  builds  on  dust, 

And  guarding  calls  not  thee  to  guard — 
For  frantic  boast  and  foolish  word, 
Thy  mercy  on  Thy  people,  Lord  I " 

Certainly  forgetfulness  of  God  is  the  first  limita- 
tion of  diplomatic  or  military  policy.  "Except 
Jehovah  keep  the  city,  the  watchman  wakethjn 
vain." 

The  second  limitation  of  politics  is  in  the  realm 
of  social  justice.  As  we  have  said,  the  faith  in 
God  advocated  by  Isaiah  was  to  show  itself  in 
works  of  righteousness.  Parallel  with  that  proph- 
et's attacks  on  foreign  policy  are  his  invectives 
against  the  domestic  conditions  of  Judah.  Isaiah 
has  much  more  concern  for  public  morality  than 
for  military  "  morale."  The  sins  he  enumerates 
are  those  familiar  to  Amos  and  Micah,  as  well  as 
to  many  other  reformers  of  more  recent  eras. 
Monopoly,  luxury,  bribery,  exploitation  of  the 
poor  and  helpless — all  these  are  to  Isaiah  expres- 
sions of  the  same  insensate  folly  and  neglect  of 
Jehovah  that  he  scored  in  connection  with  their 
secret  diplomacy  and  reliance  on  arms. 


LIMITATIONS  OF  STATECRAFT  133 

"The  harp  and  the  lute,  the  tabret  and  the  pipe,  and 

wine,  are  in  their  feasts; 
But  they  regard  not  the  work  of  Jehovah, 
Neither  have  they  considered  the  operation  of  his 
hands"  (5:12). 

The  causes  of  national  disaster  are  fundamentally 
to  be  found  in  the  social  order.  And  here  the 
rulers  and  leaders  are  responsible.  The  people 
can  rise  no  higher  than  the  priest,  the  prophet,  and 
the  noble.  The  lower  classes  cannot  be  expected 
to  practise  restraint,  mercy,  or  piety,  when  they 
are  led  by  iniquitous  teachers.  In  the  day  of 
social  upheaval  which  Isaiah  threatens,  when 
economic  want  and  military  weakness  bring 
chaos,  and  the  respectable  classes  are  supplanted 
by  upstart  authorities,  still  "the  people  shall  be 
oppressed,  every  one  by  another,  and  every  one 
by  his  neighbor."  General  greed  and  need  will 
lead  to  selfish  anarchy  and  civil  war.1  Only  by  a 
complete  conversion  of  rulers  and  counsellors  can 
Jerusalem  become  a  "citadel  of  righteousness." 
In  his  own  person  Isaiah  represented  the  alter- 
native of  the  politician.  The  terms  statesman, 
prophet,  reformer,  only  imperfectly  name  his  role. 
But  it  included  both  of  the  elements  so  woefully 
lacking  in  the  misleaders  of  Judah — consideration 
for  God  on  the  one  hand,  and  a  sense  of  respon- 
sibility for  the  common  people  on  the  other.  In 
the  few  autobiographic  passages  preserved  to  us 
i  Isaiah  3: 1-5;  9: 19-21. 


134  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

we  see  his  sense  of  divine  direction.  The  simple 
story  of  his  vision  records  the  commission  that 
came  to  him  to  speak  God's  word  to  the  unrecep- 
tive  people.  His  whole  opposition  to  current 
opinions  and  emotions  is  due  to  the  " strong  hand" 
of  Jehovah,  who  instructed  him  not  to  walk  in 
the  way  of  the  people.  He  and  his  children  were 
"for  signs  and  for  wonders  in  Israel  from  Jehovah 
of  hosts."  And  while  he  appealed  directly  to  the 
rulers,  his  method  was  not  backstairs  interview, 
but  public  proclamation.  Not  only  his  own  cap- 
tive garb  proclaimed  the  future  advance  of  As- 
syria, but  his  son's  name  and  the  formal  tablet  on 
which  it  was  recorded  served  to  advertise  his 
message  of  imminent  destruction.  "The  spoil 
speedeth,  the  prey  hasteth."  And  the  other 
son,  Shear- Jashub,  "A-Remnant-Shall-Return," 
though  his  name,  like  his  brother's,  involved  in 
the  end  both  Judah's  weal  and  woe,  was  a  "liv- 
ing epistle"  to  declare: 

A  remnant  shall  return,  even  the  remnant  of  Jacob 
unto  the  mighty  God.  For  though  thy  people,  Israel, 
be  as  the  sand  of  the  sea,  only  a  remnant  of  them 
shall  return:  a  destruction  is  determined,  overflowing 
with  righteousness  (10:21,  22). 

Isaiah's  doctrine  of  the  remnant,  like  his  Mes- 
sianic hope,  rests,  perhaps,  on  passages  and  inter- 
pretations too  doubtful  to  warrant  the  emphasis 
that  has  often  been  given.  But  in  his  conscious 


LIMITATIONS  OF  STATECRAFT  135 

opposition  to  prevailing  national  standards,  and 
in  the  group  of  disciples  in  whom  he  bound  up 
God's  testimony,  he  not  only  preached  but  created 
a  new  social  group  apart  from  the  conventional 
national  lines.  Perhaps  we  are  justified  in  con- 
sidering this  a  third  example  of  Isaiah's  apprehen- 
sion of  the  limitation  of  politics,  and  a  new  agency 
itfthe  expression  of  national  ideals — the  indepen- 
dent minority.  This  new  departure,  if  such  it 
was,  is  of  utmost  importance  for  both  religion  and 
politics.  As  has  been  said: 

The  formation  of  this  little  community  was  a  new 
thing  in  the  history  of  religion.  Till  then  no  one  had 
dreamed  of  a  fellowship  of  faith  dissociated  from  all 
national  forms,  maintained  without  the  exercise  of 
ritual  services,  bound  together  by  faith  in  the  divine 
word  alone.  It  was  the  birth  of  a  new  era  in  the  Old 
Testament  religion,  for  it  was  the  birth  of  the  concep- 
tion of  the  Church,  the  first  step  in  the  emancipation 
of  spiritual  religion  from  the  forms  of  political  life — a 
step  not  less  significant  that  all  its  consequences  were 
not  seen  till  centuries  had  passed  away.  The  com- 
munity of  true  religion  and  the  political  community 
of  Israel  had  never  before  been  separated,  even  in 
thought;  now  they  stood  side  by  side,  conscious  of 
their  mutual  antagonism,  and  never  again  fully  to  fall 
back  into  their  old  identity.1 

One  is  tempted  to  dwell  at  greater  length  on 
the  national  significance  of  Isaiah.  But  further 
expansion  is  not  needed  here.  In  the  work  just 

1 W.  Robertson  Smith,  The  Prophets  of  Israel,  pp.  274 /. 


136  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

quoted  the  subject  is  dealt  with  by  a  master 
hand  to  the  extent  of  nearly  half  the  volume. 
Isaiah  is,  in  a  sense,  typical  of  all  the  prophets; 
ex  uno  disce  omnes.  He  it  is  who  reveals  most 
clearly  the  national  implications  of  the  prophets' 
religion.  "Even  to  the  political  historian  Isaiah 
is  the  most  notable  figure  after  David  in  the 
whole  history  of  Israel." l  For  his  later  career  we 
are  dependent  upon  the  stories  in  Kings  which  we 
shall  discuss  elsewhere,  and  on  some  untrust- 
worthy traditions  of  martyrdom  at  an  advanced 
age  under  Manasseh.  His  influence  is,  however, 
written  on  more  reliable  records — the  future  re- 
ligion and  life  of  his  people.  "The  whole  subse- 
quent history  of  the  Hebrew  people  bears  the 
impress  of  Isaiah's  activity.  It  was  through  him 
that  the  word  of  prophecy,  despised  and  rejected 
when  it  was  spoken  by  Amos  and  Hosea,  became 
a  practical  power  not  only  in  the  state  but  in 
the  whole  life  of  the  nation."2  And  if  we  must 
select  but  two  elements  in  his  message,  one  posi- 
tive and  one  negative,  we  would  choose  for  exam- 
ples, as  we  have  done  in  these  two  chapters,  the 
emphasis  on  faith  as  the  first,  and,  aa  the  second, 
the  limitations  of  statecraft. 

i  W.  R.  Smith,  op.  cit.,  p.  208.  2  Ibid.,  p.  206. 


XV 

THE   PLATFORM   OF   REFORMATION 

IT  would  be  difficult  to  overpraise  the  service 
of  the  prophets  of  Israel,  who  simply  by  their 
spoken  words  endeavored  to  redeem  their  con- 
temporaries to  higher  conceptions  of  both  politics 
and  religion.  Yet  one  feels  that  their  influence 
would  have  been  only  transitory  unless  their 
words  had  been  recorded  and  their  ideals  put 
into  more  concrete  form.  It  is  our  great  good 
fortune  that  with  them,  as  with  the  greatest  of 
the  prophets,  followers,  mostly  unknown,  guaran- 
teed before  too  late  the  immortality  of  the  winged 
words  that  they  spoke.  What  the  four  gospels 
have  done  for  perpetuating  the  teaching  of  Jesus, 
the  four  volumes  of  prophetic  sermons  did  for 
the  oracles  of  the  prophets. 

It  is  impossible  to  tell  when  this  collecting  was 
done.  Apparently  by  the  time  of  Ezekiel  the 
prophet  himself  made  his  message  sure  of  written 
form.  Jeremiah  twice  had  a  summary  of  his 
teaching  prepared  by  Baruch  the  scribe.  And 
even  before  these  prophets,  perhaps  in  the  days 
of  Manasseh,  when  freedom  of  speech  was  for- 
bidden the  prophets,  some  unknown  scribes  had 
prepared  an  extensive  programme  based  on  the 
137 


138  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

standards  of  the  preceding  prophets.  Whether 
by  intention  or  by  accident,  this  document  came 
to  the  hands  of  King  Josiah  of  Judah  in  the  year 
621.  But  instead  of  burning  it  in  the  fire  as  his 
successor  did  to  the  roll  of  Jeremiah,  he  accepted 
it  as  the  basis  for  a  national  reorganization  which 
is  vividly  described  near  the  end  of  77  Kings.  It 
is  this  significant  document  that  must  here  claim 
our  attention. 

There  is  much  about  the  exact  origin  of  the 
Book  of  Deuteronomy  that  still  is  uncertain.  But 
one  fact  seems  fixed,  that  it  embodies  and  ex- 
presses the  fundamental  principles  of  Josiah's 
reform.  Parts  of  it  may  be  of  later  date,  yet  the 
bulk  of  the  book  has  such  unity  of  view-point  and 
language  that  for  a  study  of  prophetic  ideals  it 
may  be  taken  as  a  whole.  And  at  once  its  mean- 
ing is  clear:  it  is  the  codification,  in  a  series  of 
definite  suggestions,  of  the  spirit  and  teachings  of 
the  great  prophets  that  preceded  it.  Its  purpose 
was  evidently  not  merely  to  put  the  prophetic 
ideals  in  writing,  but  to  reduce  them  from  general 
arraignments  or  counsels  for  specific  occasions  to 
a  definite  and  permanent  platform  of  reformation. 

It  would  be  a  mistake  to  look  upon  Deuteronomy 
as  a  complete  constitution.  It,  too,  is  sporadic  in 
its  scope.  It  is  rather  a  series  of  suggestions, 
often  based  on  earlier  laws,  but  revising  them  so 
as  to  express  the  motive  and  the  method  of  the 
prophets.  Many  of  its  detailed  instructions  are 


PLATFORM  OF  REFORMATION  139 

negative — prohibitions  against  idolatry,  against 
social  injustice  or  lack  of  consideration.  The 
negative  form  is  an  old  one  in  legislation  and  was 
a  natural  sequel  to  the  denunciations  of  the  proph- 
ets. But  at  the  same  time  it  would  be  difficult 
to  find  a  more  constructive  expression  of  the 
prophets'  desires  and  a  better  summary  of  their 
positive  contribution  to  the  nation's  ideals. 

It  is  needless  to  say  that  Deuteronomy  is  a  relig- 
ious book.  Its  laws  largely  concern  worship; 
even  its  secular  laws  are  inspired  by  religious  mo- 
tives. The  legislator  cast  his  code  in  the  form  of 
a  sermon.  Of  its  religious  and  ritual  meaning  we 
shall  not  here  speak.  That  is  the  feature  about 
Deuteronomy  which  is  most  widely  known  or  most 
readily  learned  from  modern  commentators.  It 
is  mentioned  here  only  as  the  first  and  universal 
characteristic  of  all  Hebrew  national  ideals,  espe- 
cially those  of  the  prophets. 

The  political  importance  of  the  Deuteronomic 
reform  is  usually  overlooked.  It  is  comparable 
to  a  revolution  rather  than  to  a  reformation — a 
revolution  in  which  the  scattered  communities  of 
Judah  were  formed  into  a  centralized  city-state, 
the  king  was  subjected  to  a  popularly  ratified 
constitution,  and  many  new  provisions  were  en- 
acted for  the  military  and  judicial  branches  of  the 
government,  for  the  abolition  or  reduction  of 
slavery  and  the  extension  of  popular  government. 
And  the  same  emphasis  may  be  laid  upon  the 


140  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

political  element  in  the  new  law.  It  was  not  a 
new  Book  of  Discipline  but  a  Constitution.  As 
Todd  has  said:  "The  primary  intention  of  the 
Deuteronomic  Code  is  political;  there  is,  indeed, 
a  great  deal  of  religion  in  it,  but  it  is  political 
religion.  The  aim  sought  is  not  the  glory  of 
God,  but  the  safety  and  welfare  of  the  state."1 
We  are  justified,  therefore,  in  seeking  in  the  book 
some  guidance  in  our  study  of  the  nation's  ideals. 

In  the  first  place,  it  is  well  to  note  the  patriotism 
of  the  author  (for  convenience  we  use  the  singular 
without  excluding  at  all  the  possibility  of  a  plu- 
rality of  "Deuteronomists").  He  is  proud  of  his 
nation  and  its  history,  of  its  "good  land"  and  its 
wealth,  and,  above  all,  of  its  God  and  its  religion. 
God  has  made  his  nation  "high  above  all  nations 
which  he  hath  made,  in  praise  and  in  name  and 
in  honor."  Even  other  nations  recognize  this 
superiority  and  say:  "Surely  this  great  nation  is 
a  wise  and  understanding  people." 

This  patriotism  of  Deuteronomy  is  not  merely 
implicit  but  explicit.  There  is  a  distinct  national 
self-consciousness,  which  is  fostered  not  only  by 
international  comparison  but  by  the  retrospect  of 
history.  Although  the  literary  form  of  the  book 
places  it  at  the  beginning  of  national  life,  its 
spirit  agrees  with  its  real  date  and  presupposes  a 
sense  of  national  continuity.  The  nation's  pres- 
ent is  linked  with  its  past  in  grateful  memory,  in 
1  Politics  and  Religion  in  Ancient  Israel,  p.  218. 


PLATFORM  OF  REFORMATION  141 

stern  warning,  and  in  assurance  of  God's  continu- 
ing care.  The  election  of  Israel  was  not  a  mere 
isolated  act  of  the  past.  Israel  is  still  a  people  of 
God's  own  possession.  The  covenant  of  Sinai  is 
a  perpetual  covenant,  to  be  observed  not  merely 
by  the  generation  that  had  been  present,  but  by 
the  generations  which  had  not  seen  and  yet  had 
believed.  It  secures  the  continuance  of  a  con- 
sistent national  policy. 

It  is  in  this  connection  that  the  solidarity  of 
the  individual  finds  expression.  Each  single  Is- 
raelite shares  the  blessings  and  responsibilities  of 
the  whole  state.  All  the  deeds  of  all  the  citizens 
must  contribute  to  the  nation's  welfare.  The 
unity  of  the  nation  and  the  identity  of  the  indi- 
vidual with  the  nation  are  so  firmly  established 
that  it  is  often  difficult  to  determine  whether  the 
singular  pronouns  in  the  book  refer  to  the  person- 
ified state  or  to  the  citizen  as  a  corporate  part  of 
the  nation's  life. 

These  two  characteristics  are  well  illustrated 
by  the  liturgy  of  the  first-fruits  in  Chapter  XXVI. 
The  worship,  as  we  shall  see,  is  not  personal  but 
national,  and  not  merely  a  present  isolated  act 
but  a  sacrament  that  binds  the  men  now  .living 
with  all  generations  before  them.  "  And  so," 
writes  Welch,  "when  the  writer  says  at  the  con- 
clusion of  his  beautiful  and  expressive  ritual, 
'Thou  hast  avouched  Jehovah  this  day  to  be 
thy  God,'  he  is  filled  with  the  sense  of  how  each 


142  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

worshipper  is  the  member  of  a  nation  that  lives 
under  the  one  eternal  covenant.  Each  act  of  its 
organic  life  in  its  worship  is  the  act  of  men  who 
thus  take  up  and  serve  themselves  heirs  to  their 
past.  Above  all,  each  act  in  which  a  man  in 
Israel  shows  himself  conscious  of  God's  mercy 
to  him  and  of  God's  will  for  him  is  something  in 
which  he  avouches  himself  anew  the  heir  of  the 
life  that  has  sustained  all  his  nation's  history.  A 
little  deed  of  ritual  renews  the  sense  of  their 
organic  life  and  expresses  afresh  their  historic 
identity  and  their  corporate  unity."1 

Although  the  Deuteronomist  is  a  firm  believer 
in  the  elect  and  peculiar  relation  of  Israel  to  God, 
his  treatment  of  this  subject  is  much  like  that  of 
Amos.  The  election  is  not  absolutely  unique;  at 
least  God  has  settled  other  nations  on  their  lands, 
much  as  he  has  given  Palestine  to  Israel.2  Elec- 
tion involves  duties  rather  than  privileges,  the 
duties  described  in  this  law.  It  means  service,  as 
the  great  prophet  of  the  exile  had  yet  to  point 
out  more  clearly,  and  service  as  God's  witness  to 
the  world.  Thus  the  author  was  able  to  com- 
bine the  highest  patriotism  with  humility  and 
freedom  from  national  egoism. 

To  fulfil  such  a  destiny  the  essential  thing  for 
Judah  was  not  political  domination  or  control, 
but  superiority  of  civilization.  Not  victory  by 

1  Welch,  Religion  of  Israel  under  the  Kingdom,  p.  218. 
*Deut.  2:5,  9,  19;  Amos  9:7. 


PLATFORM  OF  REFORMATION  143 

arms  but  the  nobility  of  its  institutions  is  to 
secure  the  admiration  of  neighboring  peoples.  It 
is  true  the  programme  calls  for  the  drastic  elimi- 
nation of  the  Canaanites,  but  this  is  not  an  act 
of  triumph  but  an  act  of  purification.  The  author 
does  not  seem  to  contemplate  any  conquests  be- 
yond or  to  encourage  a  policy  of  militarism. 
Here  he  follows  the  trail  of  Isaiah,  with  his  idea 
of  trust  in  God.  His  conception,  as  Welch  says, 
is  "the  great  conception  of  a  nation  which  is 
filled  throughout  with  the  sense  that  it  has  its 
own  character  to  preserve  and  its  own  work  to 
fulfil,  and  which  is  more  interested  in  these  things 
than  in  asserting  its  place  in  the  world.  The  lat- 
ter concern  it  leaves  to  the  unseen  Providence 
who  governs  all  our  outward  fate;  the  former  it 
turns  to  consider  with  its  whole  heart."1 

The  author's  pride  is  far  removed  from  chau- 
vinism or  complacent  self-satisfaction.  Israel's 
greatness  is  not  due  to  her  own  merit;  it  is  due 
purely  to  God's  love  and  election.  They  were 
the  fewest  in  number  of  all  peoples.  A  Syrian 
ready  to  perish  was  their  father,  but  he  became 
a  nation,  great,  mighty,  and  populous.  It  was 
God  who  brought  them  through  the  desert  and 
gave  them  their  land.  It  was  he  who  defeated 
their  foes  before  them.  Both  military  and  moral 
conceit  is  forbidden  them:  "Beware  lest  .  .  . 
thou  say  in  thy  heart,  my  power  and  the  might  of 
1  Welch,  Religion  of  Israel  under  the  Kingdom,  p.  223. 


144  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

my  hand  hath  gotten  me  this  wealth."  "Speak 
not  thou  in  thy  heart.  .  .  .  For  my  righteousness 
Jehovah  hath  brought  me  in  to  possess  this  land."  * 
It  is  not  for  their  own  righteousness  or  for  the 
uprightness  of  their  heart  that  they  possess  the 
land.  Nor  is  their  tenure  secure.  The  fate  they 
have  inflicted  on  the  Canaanites  will  be  their  own 
if  they  share  their  wickedness.  Their  prosperity 
is  contingent  on  obedience  to  this  law.  That 
simple  rule  became  the  standard  of  all  later  his- 
tory. 

But  beside  the  materialistic  motive  of  reward 
and  punishment  associated  with  Deuteronomy, 
more  spiritual  motives  are  appealed  to  in  the 
book.  The  famous  twofold  summary  of  love  to 
God  and  love  to  neighbor  finds  repeated  expres- 
sion in  its  laws.  The  whole  code  is  an  eloquent 
appeal  for  a  grateful  response  to  the  love  of  God. 
History  is  considered  here,  as  by  Hosea,  the  mov- 
ing story  of  God's  patient  dealing  with  a  forget- 
ful and  unappreciative  nation.  The  appeal  to 
memory — "lest  ye  forget" — is  more  often  used 
to  recall  God's  goodness  and  mercy  than  to  recall 
his  severity  and  justice.  The  election  and  the 
prosperity  of  Israel  are  marks  of  Jehovah's  love. 
Therefore  love  should  flow  back  to  him  in  return 
— a  love  that  springs  from  the  whole  being. 

Man's  love  for  men  is  closely  associated  with 
God's  love  for  them.  It  is  his  divine  example 
lDeut.  8:17;  9:4. 


PLATFORM  OF  REFORMATION  145 

that  inspires  the  new  social  relations.  "He  doth 
execute  justice  for  the  fatherless  and  widow,  and 
loveth  the  sojourner  in  giving  him  food  and  rai- 
ment. Love  ye,  therefore,  the  sojourner."  And 
here  at  once  a  second  common  argument  is  added : 
"For  ye  were  sojourners  in  the  land  of  Egypt." 
The  past  of  Israel  is  a  memory  that  con- 
demns any  injustice  from  superior  social  standing. 
Their  own  exaltation  up  from  slavery  made  it 
easy  for  them  to  picture  the  situation  of  the  op- 
pressed and  to  sympathize  with  the  suffering. 

And  here  again  we  find  ourselves  on  the  same 
social  level  as  the  prophets.  It  has  been  some- 
times argued  that  this  programme  and  the  revo- 
lution that  followed  it  emanated  from  the  upper 
classes  of  the  state — either  the  priests  or  the 
nobles.  This  it  is  difficult  to  disprove,  and  cer- 
tainly, if  the  account  in  Kings  is  to  be  trusted, 
its  ultimate  ratification  by  the  king  and  his  offi- 
cers was  secured,  though  the  formal  adoption 
was  an  act  of  the  whole  people  gathered  in  demo- 
cratic assembly.  At  any  rate  the  characteristic 
prophetic  concern  for  the  oppressed  and  unrep- 
resented classes  of  society  betokens  at  least  the 
influence  of  the  prophets.  Many  of  the  specific 
rulings  aim  to  safeguard  and  extend  the  privileges 
of  these  helpless  classes.  The  workers  are  to  be 
provided  with  holidays,  the  hungry  are  to  be 
guaranteed  food,  men  with  capital  are  to  lend 
freely  and  not  to  demand  interest,  nor  to  take 


146  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

as  pledge  things  essential  to  their  debtors  for  food 
and  clothing;  wages  are  to  be  paid  promptly.1 
The  perversion  of  the  law  courts  and  the  use  of 
false  weights — sins  so  frequently  mentioned  by 
the  prophets — are  here  expressly  forbidden.  And 
a  regular  cycle  is  provided  for  the  remission  of 
debts,  the  release  of  slaves,  and  reversion  of  land 
to  its  original  owner.  In  all  these  laws  the  spirit 
of  human  brotherhood  and  co-operation  finds  full 
and  practical  expression. 

In  spite  of  its  proletarian  sympathies  and  dem- 
ocratic spirit  the  Deuteronomic  revolution  ap- 
pears to  have  involved  few  political  changes. 
The  king  remains,  but  he  is  a  constitutional  mon- 
arch only.  Like  all  citizens,  he  is  subject  to  the 
law:  "It  shall  be  with  him,  and  he  shall  read 
therein  all  the  days  of  his  life  .  .  .  that  his  heart 
be  not  lifted  up  above  his  brethren,  and  that  he 
turn  not  aside  from  the  commandment,  to  the 
right  hand,  or  to  the  left.'* 2  He  is  to  avoid  the 
constant  dangers  of  the  Hebrew  monarchs, — reli- 
ance on  Egyptian  cavalry,  the  distraction  of  the 
harem,  and  the  accumulation  of  large  treasures 
of  silver  and  gold.  Of  course  the  king,  himself, 
must  be  a  full-blooded  Hebrew.  There  is  also 
the  prophet,  the  authoritative  native  adviser  of 
the  nation's  policy,  who,  like  Moses,  shall  serve 
as  Jehovah's  spokesman  to  the  people  at  each 
successive  time  of  crisis.  As  Jehovah  had  told 
Moses: 

1  Deut.  24:6-25:4.  2  Deut.  17:14-20. 


PLATFORM  OF  REFORMATION  147 

I  will  raise  them  up  a  prophet  from  among  their 
brethren,  like  unto  thee;  and  I  will  put  my  words  in 
his  mouth,  and  he  shall  speak  unto  them  all  that  I 
shall  command  him.  And  it  shall  come  to  pass,  that 
whosoever  will  not  hearken  unto  my  words  which  he 
shall  speak  in  my  name,  I  will  require  it  of  him 
(Deut.  18:18, 19). 

i 

This  conception  of  an  unofficial  but  influential 
series  of  prophets  was  also  typical  of  the  pro- 
phetic ideal,  as  we  shall  see  in  the  next  chapter. 

Many  of  the  individual  laws  are  merely  repeti- 
tions of  older  codes.  Sometimes  the  only  change 
is  in  the  motive  involved  or  at  least  the  elabora- 
tion of  the  motive,  as  in  the  old  Sabbath  law, 
whose  purpose  in  Deuteronomy  is  represented  as 
primarily  a  provision  for  the  laboring  class.  Even 
domestic  animals  are  included  in  this  humani- 
tarian purpose — as,  again,  in  the  law  against  muz- 
zling "the  ox  when  he  treadeth  out  the  grain." 
As  far  as  we  can  observe,  the  most  radical  changes 
affected  chiefly  the  cultus — the  centralization  of 
the  worship  in  Jerusalem,  with  the  consequent 
provisions  needed  for  the  support  of  disestab- 
lished priests,  etc.  Indirectly,  however,  this 
change  affected  national  life.  It  was  really  a 
final  act  of  religious  establishment — the  national- 
ization of  religion.  This  momentous  act,  no 
doubt,  was  contrary  to  the  growing  individualism 
in  religion  which  Jeremiah  stood  for,  and  even  to 
that  independence  of  political  thought  and  action 


148  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

which,  at  least  in  the  prophets,  was  beginning  to 
emerge,  but  it  prepared  the  way  for  the  trans- 
formation of  the  state  into  a  church,  so  that 
when  the  national  structure  was  destroyed  a  few 
years  later,  Judaism  as  a  distinctive  culture  sur- 
vived. In  this  way  the  prophets*  insistence  upon 
the  superiority  of  national  ideals  to  national 
security  and  autonomy  was  fully  vindicated. 

But  probably  the  greatest  service  of  Deuteron- 
omy was  not  in  any  or  all  of  its  provisions,  but 
simply  in  its  written  character.  As  we  have  said, 
it  contains  little  that  was  new,  either  in  spirit  or 
in  letter.  But  by  joining  the  spirit  of  the  proph- 
ets with  the  letter  of  the  law,  by  reducing  princi- 
ples to  practical  application,  by  combining  in  a 
single  clear  and  effective  programme,  not  Utopian 
schemes  but  some  tentative  suggestions  that  were 
feasible  enough  to  be  accepted  at  least  as  a  basis 
for  the  actual  revision  of  Hebrew  institutions,  it 
became,  when  once  ratified,  a  work  of  surpassing 
influence  upon  all  later  generations.  Its  con- 
creteness  was  its  merit  (as  well  as  its  weakness). 
As  the  author  says:  "It  is  not  too  hard  for  thee, 
neither  is  it  far  off.  It  is  not  in  heaven,  that 
thou  shouldest  say,  Who  shall  go  up  for  us  to 
heaven,  and  bring  it  unto  us,  and  make  us  to 
hear  it,  that  we  may  do  it?  .  .  .  But  the  word 
is  very  nigh  unto  thee,  in  thy  mouth,  and  in  thy 
heart,  that  thou  mayest  do  it."  *  About  it  clus- 
^Deut.  30: 12-14. 


PLATFORM  OF  REFORMATION  149 

tered  finally  the  whole  Bible—first  the  Old  Tes- 
tament and  then  the  New,  as  the  written  and 
permanent  programme  of  a  new  society.  Deu- 
teronomy made  Judaism  the  religion  of  a  book, 
and  this  nucleus,  with  its  later  associates,  became 
the  constitution  of  the  church — both  Jewish  and 
Christian.  It  is  possible  that  much  of  its  original 
intention  failed  of  immediate  or  universal  fulfil- 
ment. There  was  much  of  it  that  required  far 
more  than  mere  outward  conformity,  for  example, 
the  injunctions  to  love  and  the  prohibition  against 
coveting.  But  as  an  essay  toward  a  better  defini- 
tion of  national  motives  and  social  standards  it 
should  be  classed  with  the  most  influential  char- 
ters of  history. 


XVI 

PROPHETIC  IDEALS  IN  ACTION 

BESIDES  the  sermons  of  the  prophets  and  their 
codifications  of  the  laws  there  was  a  third  method 
by  which  these  propagandists  influenced  their 
contemporaries  and  by  which  their  ideals  are 
known  to  us.  This  is  the  writing  of  history  from 
the  prophetic  view-point,  a  method  which  is  illus- 
trated, among  others,  by  the  Books  of  Kings. 
Not  only  the  editorial  outline  of  this  work  shows 
the  plain  marks  of  prophetic  authorship — the  same 
school  of  thought  that  produced  Deuteronomy: 
even  the  earlier  and  more  naive  material  which 
is  inserted  into  this  outline  consists  of  stories 
with  a  purpose.  They  are  not  all  of  the  same 
date  and  authorship.  There  are  several  cycles. 
Yet  practically  all  of  them  have  in  common  the 
prophetic  outlook  and  the  emphasis  upon  the  pro- 
phetic function.  The  stories  of  Elisha,  for  ex- 
ample, are  probably  a  single  group.  They  are 
written  in  a  racy  style,  with  deep  veneration  for 
the  hero,  but  with  more  emphasis  upon  his  won- 
der-working power  than  upon  his  political  rela- 
tions. The  other  stories  are  not  all  so  homo- 
geneous as  this  group  about  Elisha.  In  few  of 
them  the  miraculous  element  is  so  prominent, 

150 


IDEALS   IN  ACTION  151 

and  they  give  the  prophets  a  greater  political 
role.1  The  authors  wished  to  prove  by  example 
the  service  of  prophecy  to  the  people,  to  show 
their  own  standards  in  action,  and  to  encourage 
their  associates  and  disciples  in  fidelity  to  the 
prophetic  ideals.  They  represented  their  own 
order  as  the  real  foundation  of  the  nation.  "Be- 
ginning with  Moses  and  all  the  prophets,"  they 
expounded  their  ideal  of  a  theocracy  by  picturing 
the  actual  government  of  the  past  in  this  form. 
The  greatness  of  the  nation,  according  to  their 
records,  was  due  to  the  leadership  of  a  series  of 
prophets:  "By  a  prophet  Jehovah  brought  Israel 
up  out  of  Egypt,  and  by  a  prophet  was  he  pre- 
served."2 As  Plato,  the  philosopher,  gave  the 
chief  authority  in  his  ideal  commonwealth  to 
philosophers,  so  the  prophetic  historians,  in  their 
idealized  history,  magnified  the  contributions  of 
their  predecessor  prophets. 

It  would  be  a  long  but  interesting  task  to  study 
the  prophetic  ideals  as  revealed  in  the  biographies 
of  the  Books  of  Kings — to  consider  in  detail  the 
stories  of  the  several  prophets,  not  only  of  the 
more  familiar  figures,  but  also  of  Nathan,  Ahijah, 
Shemaiah,  Jehu  ben  Hanani,  Micaiah  ben  Imlah, 
Jonah,  Huldah,  and  even  of  many  an  unnamed 
"man  of  God."  In  all  these  stories  the  political 

1  For  a  vivid  description  of  the  style  and  purpose  of  these 
stories  see  J.  C.  Todd,  Politics  and  Religion  in  Ancient  Israel, 
pp.  139  jf. 

«Hoseal2:13. 


152  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

ideals  of  the  prophets  appear  in  action,  and  par- 
ticularly there  emerges  that  more  intimate  prob- 
lem of  the  individual  prophet's  duty  to  the  state. 
They  are  a  noble  series  of  figures,  patriotic  and 
faithful,  but  yet  uncompromising  in  the  allegiance 
to  God  and  to  the  higher  ideals,  which  they  held 
out  to  their  people.  They  are  the  portraits  of 
prophets  by  prophets  and  thus  contain  in  double 
measure  the  essence  of  the  prophetic  ideal.  Here 
the  spirit  of  the  prophets  is  subject  to  the  proph- 
ets and  not  to  the  perversions  of  unsympathetic 
historians.  And  the  portraits  are  individual  and 
varied  and  not  all  of  the  same  mould.  Many  of 
them  were  prophets  of  warning,  harbingers  of 
disaster — like  those  unnamed  spokesmen  of  Jeho- 
vah who  declared: 

Behold,  I  bring  such  evil  upon  Jerusalem  and  Judah, 
that  whosoever  heareth  of  it,  both  his  ears  shall  tingle. 
And  I  will  stretch  over  Jerusalem  the  line  of  Samaria, 
and  the  plummet  of  the  house  of  Ahab;  and  I  will  wipe 
Jerusalem  as  a  man  wipeth  a  dish,  wiping  it  and  turn- 
ing it  upside  down  (II  Kings  21:12,  13). 

Others  were  forecasters  and  instigators  of  na- 
tional success.  So  we  are  casually  told,  when 
Jeroboam  II  "restored  the  border  of  Israel  from 
the  entrance  of  Hamath  unto  the  sea  of  the 
Arabah,"  that  this  maximum  extension  of  power 
was  "  according  to  the  word  of  Jehovah,  the  God 
of  Israel,  which  he  spake  by  his  servant  Jonah 


IDEALS  IN  ACTION  153 

the  son  of  Amittai,  the  prophet,  who  was  of  Gath- 
Hepher."  It  will  be  necessary  to  limit  ourselves 
to  one  example  of  each  of  these  types. 

Elijah  of  Gilead  was  a  prophet  of  the  sterner 
mould.  There  is  no  reason  to  doubt  his  exist- 
ence or  the  essential  elements  of  his  portrait,  but 
some  of  the  narratives  suggest  an  origin  in  the 
days  of  Manasseh  of  Judah,  when  the  conflict 
between  Baal  and  Jehovah  was  acute,  and  the 
prophets  of  the  latter  were  under  the  ban  of 
royal  displeasure.1  As  pictured  by  his  biogra- 
phers, Elijah  is  the  illustration  of  the  persecuted 
but  faithful  prophet.  Courage  and  thoroughness 
are  the  marks  of  his  character.  Coming  from  the 
desert,  clad  in  the  rough  garb  of  the  nomad,  he 
represents  the  simplicity  of  conservative  religion 
against  the  background  of  court  luxury.  His  re- 
lations with  the  king  suggest  that  fearless  relation 
of  the  later  nomads  to  the  court  of  the  caliphs  of 
Damascus  or  Bagdad.  "Into  the  council  of  the 
mighty  caliph  in  his  civilized  and  luxurious  capi- 
tal would  stride  a  rough  captain,  a  wild  dervish 
or  preacher,  a  free  son  of  the  desert,  asserting  a 
democratic  equality  strangely  in  contrast  with  the 
apparent  autocracy,  a  simplicity  in  apparently 
irreconcilable  conflict  with  the  luxury  of  city  and 
court.  To  the  face  of  the  monarch  such  a  man 
would  utter  his  word  with  unhesitating  directness, 

1  So  Todd,  op.  eit.,  pp.  195  ff.    Many  scholars  date  them 
earlier. 


154  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

quite  the  opposite  of  the  obedience  of  the  official 
or  the  flattery  of  the  courtier.  ...  So  Israel 
preserved  in  the  midst  of  increasing  luxury  and 
civilization  a  keen  consciousness  of  its  desert 
origin,  its  native  and  democratic  simplicity.  The 
heart  of  the  people  at  large  responded  to  the  man 
who  asserted  that  simplicity  and  plainness  in  the 
face  of  the  king  and  court." 1 

Elijah's  democratic  standpoint  is  best  shown  in 
the  incident  of  Naboth.  The  inalienable  rights 
of  private  property  were  assailed  by  the  ambition 
of  the  king.  In  his  autocratic  methods  he  was 
ably  inspired  and  assisted  by  his  foreign  wife. 
Kingship,  as  Jezebel  conceived  it,  had  no  limita- 
tion of  popular  rights,  or  at  least  it  was  able  to 
secure  by  foul  means  what  fair  means  could  not 
accomplish.  She  could  both  kill  and  take  posses- 
sion. Judicial  murder  under  cover  of  law,  and 
royal  appropriation  of  the  estate  of  a  factitious 
criminal,  were  her  simple  and  familiar  methods. 
Here  was  a  concrete  instance  of  those  crimes 
against  which  Amos  and  the  other  prophets  in- 
veighed— panting  after  the  dust  of  the  earth  on 
the  head  of  the  poor,  joining  field  to  field,  turning 
justice  to  wormwood,  turning  aside  the  needy  in 
the  gate  from  their  right.  Against  this  high- 
handed autocracy  Elijah  raised  his  voice.  He 
was  not  deceived  by  legal  subterfuges  or  cowed 
by  servile  fear.  It  was  a  royal  crime  comparable 
1  Peters,  Religion  of  the  Hebrews,  p.  176. 


IDEALS  IN  ACTION  155 

to  David's  sin,  and  where  such  abuse  exists  pro- 
testants  like  Nathan  and  Elijah  must  in  due 
time  appear.  If  these  are  not  heeded  national 
disaster  is  sure  to  come.  Social  injustice  is  the 
real  cause  of  proletarian  uprising.  And  the 
bloody  revolt  of  Jehu  was  the  inevitable  punish- 
ment upon  Jezebel  and  the  house  of  Ahab  for 
their  violation  of  democratic  rights. 

At  first  sight  the  other  conflict  between  king 
and  prophet  seems  purely  religious — a  choice  of 
religious  cults,  in  which  Elijah  is  the  champion  of 
the  old-time  religion  against  an  imported  cult. 
To  academic  religionists  it  may  seem  so,  but 
other  issues  lay  behind  it.  Foreign  gods  came 
from  a  foreign  alliance.  They  meant  foreign  po- 
litical and  social  institutions — a  foreign  culture 
with  immoral  and  undemocratic  tendencies.  The 
contest  in  Israel  between  Jehovah  and  the  Phoeni- 
cian Baal  was  more  than  a  mere  conflict  of  relig- 
ions. Like  the  contest  of  Jehovah  and  the  Ca- 
naanite  Baals  which  it  followed  and  for  which 
it  gave  the  historians  a  new  interest  and  color,  it 
was  essentially  a  conflict  of  civilizations.  Elijah 
is  the  defender  of  a  pure  nationalism,  the  un- 
compromising opponent  of  foreign  customs  and 
worships.  The  court  and  its  official  prophets 
desired  a  syncretism  of  worships  and  cultures. 
The  people  were  divided  and  uncertain — "limp- 
ing," as  Elijah  says,  between  two  opinions.  The 
scene  at  Mt.  Carmel  is  the  dramatic  presentation 


156  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

of  the  choice  and  the  striking  vindication  of  the 
religion  of  Jehovah.  To  the  idealist  there  is  no 
blurring  of  the  issue;  no  compromise  is  possible. 
The  alternatives  are  clear  and  irreconcilable,  and 
the  signal  discomfiture  of  the  Baal  worshippers 
means  the  complete  triumph  of  the  prophet's  God. 
It  is  easy  to  understand  the  interest  of  pro- 
phetic historians  in  these  elements  in  Elijah's 
career.  But  still  more  consoling  to  them  than 
this  vindication  of  the  prophets  must  have  been 
the  story  of  Elijah's  flight  and  despondency. 
From  the  trying  circumstances  of  his  own  day 
the  writer  has  given  us  a  bit  of  psychological 
study  that  for  autobiographic  interest  must  rank 
with  the  noble  confessions  of  Jeremiah.  The 
circumstances  are  similar.  The  prophet  is  dis- 
couraged and  hunted  to  death.  His  cause  seems 
lost,  his  life  not  worth  living.  And  so  he  lies 
down  to  die  alone  in  the  wilderness.  In  the 
mount  of  God  he  has  an  experience  of  Jehovah 
like  that  which  came  to  Isaiah  in  the  temple. 
Conscious  of  the  crisis  in  the  nation's  life,  the 
universal  wickedness  and  unfaithfulness  of  his 
fellow  countrymen,  conscious  also  of  his  own 
failure  to  rise  above  the  level  by  his  brave  but 
unavailing  efforts,  overwhelmed  with  a  sense  of 
loneliness  which  is  the  more  acute  because  of  his 
exceeding  zeal — in  such  a  mood  he  is  ripe  for 
the  divine  assurance.  God  speaks  to  him  in  the 
secret  of  his  heart — by  the  still  small  voice — and 


IDEALS  IN  ACTION  157 

sends  him  forth  with  courage  to  a  task  whose  full 
success  cannot  be  known  in  the  gloom  of  the 
present,  but  only  by  its  indirect  but  momentous 
results  upon  future  generations.  To  the  despon- 
dent prophet  comes  the  ringing  challenge,  "  What 
doest  thou  here,  Elijah?"  And  with  new  confi- 
dence he  returns  to  his  work,  conscious  of  God's 
presence  and  help,  and  assured,  as  Jeremiah  says: 

Since  God  is  with  me,  I  triumph  like  a  hero.1 

Our  other  illustration  is  an  incident  in  the  his- 
tory of  Judah,  the  famous  escape  of  Jerusalem 
from  Sennacherib.  The  narrative  of  Kings, 
though  it  raises  many  historical  and  literary  prob- 
lems, is  a  telling  example  of  prophetic  history.2 
The  crisis  is  one  of  foreign  rather  than  domestic 
affairs,  but  the  hero,  as  in  the  incident  from 
Ahab's  reign,  is  not  the  weakling  king  but  a 
prophet — and  no  phantom  figure,  either,  but  a 
genuine  historical  character,  Isaiah  of  Jerusalem. 
The  traits  of  his  message,  familiar  to  us  from  his 
sermons,  here  are  put  in  dramatic  setting.  Once 

1  Jer.  20:11,  Buttenwieser. 

SII  Bangs  18:17-19:37,  copied  thence  with  other  bio- 
graphical stories  of  Isaiah  in  the  appendix  of  I  Isaiah.  The 
problems,  aside  from  the  question  of  historicity,  are  principally 
(a)  whether  this  incident  should  be  dated  at  the  invasion  of 
Sennacherib  in  701  B.  c.  or  on  a  later  campaign  about  690, 
and  (b)  whether  there  were  two  ultimatums  or  two  versions 
interwoven  in  the  present  text.  See  commentaries  for  a 
discussion  of  these  points. 


158  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

more  we  have  a  duel — on  the  one  side  Rabshakeh, 
the  diplomat  of  the  proud  Assyrian  empire,  on 
the  other  Eliakim,  Shebnah,  and  Joah,  the  rep- 
resentatives of  the  helpless  Judah.  It  is  a  duel 
not  of  armies  nor  of  men,  but  of  gods  and  national 
ideals.  How  characteristic  of  the  philosophy  of 
force  is  the  argument  of  the  Assyrian!  This 
clever  diplomat  knows  well  the  military  weakness 
and  internal  dissensions  in  his  enemy's  position. 
He  understands  the  pro-Egyptian  fallacy  of  one 
party  and  the  passive  trust-in-God  policy  which 
Isaiah  opposes  to  it.  He  knows  even  the  religious 
controversies  that  culminated  in  Hezekiah's  re- 
form, and  the  advanced  international  theology  of 
the  prophets  with  its  non-partisan  God,  and  he 
makes  capital  of  all  this  information.  His  speech 
is  a  masterpiece: 

Thus  saith  the  great  king,  the  king  of  Assyria, 
What  confidence  is  this  wherein  thou  trustest? 
Thou  sayest  (but  they  are  but  vain  words),  There  is 
counsel  and  strength  for  the  war.  Now  on  whom  dost 
thou  trust,  that  thou  hast  rebelled  against  me  ?  Now, 
behold,  thou  trustest  upon  the  staff  of  this  bruised 
reed,  even  upon  Egypt;  whereon  if  a  man  lean,  it  will 
go  into  his  hand,  and  pierce  it:  so  is  Pharaoh  king  of 
Egypt  unto  all  that  trust  on  him. 

But  if  ye  say  unto  me,  We  trust  in  Jehovah  our 
God;  is  not  that  he,  whose  high  places  and  whose 
altars  Hezekiah  hath  taken  away,  and  hath  said  to 
Judah  and  to  Jerusalem,  Ye  shall  worship  before  thig 
altar  in  Jerusalem  ? 


IDEALS  IN  ACTION  159 

Now  therefore,  I  pray  thee,  give  pledges  to  my 
master  the  king  of  Assyria,  and  I  will  give  thee  two 
thousand  horses,  if  thou  be  able  on  thy  part  to  set 
riders  upon  them.  How  then  canst  thou  turn  away 
the  face  of  one  captain  of  the  least  of  my  master's 
servants,  and  put  thy  trust  on  Egypt  for  chariots  and 
for  horsemen? 

Am  I  now  come  up  without  Jehovah  against  this 
place  to  destroy  it?  Jehovah  said  unto  me,  Go  up 
against  this  land  and  destroy  it  (II  Kings  18:19-25). 

Though  his  words  are  addressed  to  the  king, 
they  are  meant  for  general  consumption.  But  it 
was  easy  for  Hebrew  nobles  to  see  that  such  per- 
suasive arguments  should  not  be  allowed  to  reach 
the  ears  of  the  people  uncensored.  The  people 
who  overheard  could  not  be  trusted,  with  all  their 
dissensions  and  ignorance,  to  share  the  confidence 
of  the  royal  diplomats.  Such  hostile  propaganda 
was  calculated  to  breed  sheer  defeatism.  Secrecy 
of  negotiation  was  desirable  to  preserve  the  He- 
brew morale.  Therefore,  said  Eliakim  the  son  of 
Hilkiah,  and  Shebnah  and  Joah  unto  Rabshakeh: 

Speak,  I  pray  thee,  to  thy  servants  in  the  Syrian 
language;  for  we  understand  it;  and  speak  not  with 
us  in  the  Jews'  language,  in  the  ears  of  the  people  that 
are  on  the  wall. 

But  Rabshakeh  knows  well  the  value  of  open 
negotiations  in  undermining  the  enemy's  unity 
of  counsel.  He  would  appeal  to  the  people  over 


160  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

the  heads  of  their  representatives,  he  would 
estrange  them  from  their  government  and  would 
offer  them  favorable  terms  for  disloyalty.  He 
would  demand  unconditional  surrender,  not  be- 
cause it  is  deserved,  but  because  he  thinks  he  can 
get  it.  He  has  an  army  at  his  back  to  enforce 
his  demands,  an  army  that  none  of  the  gods  of 
other  nations  has  been  able  to  resist,  not  even 
Jehovah  himself  in  the  fateful  siege  of  Samaria. 
For  Rabshakeh's  diplomatic  offensive  everything 
is  to  be  gained  by  publicity,  and  so  he  "  cried  with 
a  loud  voice  in  the  Jews'  language"  to  the  very 
populace  that  suffered  the  most  from  siege. 
"But  the  people  held  their  peace,  and  answered 
not  a  word;  for  the  king's  commandment  was, 
saying,  Answer  him  not." 

In  these  dire  straits  the  anxious  king  and  court 
consult  the  prophet  Isaiah.  Against  this  back- 
ground of  general  alarm  over  a  calamity  that 
threatened  all  that  they  held  dear — including  the 
very  integrity  of  the  state — Isaiah's  wonted 
"quietness  and  confidence"  are  most  impressive. 
His  reply  to  Hezekiah  is  prompt,  brief,  and  em- 
phatic; 

Thus  saith  Jehovah,  Be  not  afraid  of  the  words  that 
thou  hast  heard,  wherewith  the  servants  of  the  king 
of  Assyria  have  blasphemed  me.  Behold,  I  will  put  a 
spirit  in  him,  and  he  shall  hear  tidings,  and  shall  return 
to  his  own  land;  and  I  will  cause  him  to  fall  by  the 
sword  in  his  own  land. 


IDEALS   IN  ACTION  161 

In  an  alternative  version  (unless  it  be  a  later 
incident)  the  complete  inviolability  of  the  city  is 
promised,  and  in  fulfilment  "  the  angel  of  Jehovah 
went  forth,  and  smote  in  the  camp  of  the  Assyr- 
ians a  hundred  four-score  and  five  thousand: 
and  when  men  arose  early  in  the  morning,  be- 
hold, these  were  all  dead  bodies."  So  once  more 
the  prophet  is  vindicated.  In  time  of  crisis  he 
becomes  the  real  guide  of  his  people,  the  true 
statesman,  the  national  hero.  And  the  victory 
that  overcomes  the  world  is  the  prophet's  faith. 
By  such  stories  as  these  the  devout  admirers  of 
prophecy  drove  home  powerfully  its  lessons  for 
the  nation,  and  actually  created  a  better  people 
from  the  history  of  its  past.  Such  vindications 
of  the  prophets  gave  authority  to  their  teaching 
on  national  righteousness  and  self-reliance,  until 
these  virtues  became  appropriated  as  the  realized 
achievement  of  Judaism.  And  in  these  stories 
many  men  in  successive  generations  have  found 
the  lessons  of  courage,  of  faith,  and  of  individual 
faithfulness  to  untarnished  ideals,  which  have 
made  of  them  true  patriots  and  worthy  successors 
to  the  mantle  of  Elijah  and  Isaiah. 


XVII 

AN  UNPOPULAR  PATRIOT 

THE  Book  of  Jeremiah,  in  spite  of  its  length 
and  some  confusion  in  order,  presents  a  remark- 
ably clear  picture  of  a  most  dramatic  figure.  The 
simplicity  of  his  message,  the  depth  of  his  reflec- 
tive lyrics,  and  the  vividness  of  his  experiences 
combine  to  make  living  and  modern  this  ancient 
patriot  of  Judah.  Jeremiah's  lot  was  cast  at  the 
climax  of  his  nation's  woes.  He  saw  his  people 
pass  from  the  happy,  hopeful  days  of  Josiah  to 
the  utter  desolation  of  repeated  disasters.  Of 
Josiah's  successors  only  two,  Jehoiakim  and  Zede- 
kiah,  ruled  more  than  two  or  three  months,  and 
each  of  these  brought  on  himself  and  his  people 
the  scourge  of  punitive  conquest  and  exile. 

In  many  respects  the  situation  of  Jeremiah  re- 
sembles that  of  Isaiah  just  a  century  before  him. 
Instead  of  Assyria,  Babylonia  now  held  sway  over 
all  southwestern  Asia.  But  in  Judah  a  restless 
party,  as  in  the  days  of  Hezekiah,  still  chafed 
under  foreign  dominion.  The  prophet  in  each 
case  deplored  this  political  unrest  and  advised 
submission  to  the  inevitable,  rather  than  futile 
revolt  and  entangling  alliances.  But  Jeremiah 
maintained  this  stand  further  than  Isaiah.  For 

162 


AN  UNPOPULAR  PATRIOT  163 

even  when  war  was  actually  on  and  the  besieging 
army  surrounded  the  starving  city,  Jeremiah  did 
not  wait  for  miracles  to  happen,  or  foster  a  des- 
perate hope,  but  coolly  advised  the  king  and  peo- 
ple to  surrender  and  make  the  best  terms  they 
could  with  the  enemy  rather  than  await  the  more 
disastrous  consequences  of  continued  resistance. 
He  explained  clearly  to  the  people  the  alterna- 
tives: 

Behold,  I  set  before  you  the  way  of  life  and  the  way 
of  death.  He  that  abideth  in  this  city  shall  die  by 
the  sword,  and  by  the  famine,  and  by  the  pestilence; 
but  he  that  goeth  out,  and  passeth  over  to  the  Chal- 
deans that  besiege  you,  he  shall  live  (21:8). 

To  men  obsessed  with  a  blind  absorption  in  a 
war  to  the  bitter  end  such  open  advocacy  of  de- 
sertion seemed  treasonable  and  thoroughly  dis- 
astrous. We  are  not  surprised  to  read  that  the 
princes  said  unto  the  king: 

Let  this  man,  we  j>ray  thee,  be  put  to  death;  foras- 
much as  he  weakeneth  the  hands  of  the  men  of  war 
that  remain  in  this  city,  and  the  hands  of  the  people, 
in  speaking  such  words  unto  them;  for  this  man  seek- 
eth  not  the  welfare  of  this  people,  but  the  hurt  (38:4). 

One  can  follow  through  many  chapters  the 
story  of  Jeremiah's  persistent  propaganda  and  its 
inevitable  consequences  to  himself.  With  painful 
iteration  and  with  constant  variety  of  resource  by 


164  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

speech  and  by  writing  he  presented  his  unwelcome 
message.  In  many  cases  the  religious  authorities 
were  his  chief  opponents.  When  Hananiah,  the 
prophet,  predicted  the  speedy  breaking  of  the 
Babylonian  yoke,  Jeremiah  dramatically  answered 
the  false  hopes  of  his  countryman  in  his  own  fig- 
ures; the  yoke  of  Babylonia  is  a  yoke  of  iron  and 
not  of  wood.  When  Jeremiah  predicted  the  deso- 
lation of  the  Jerusalem  temple  the  chief  of  police 
put  him  in  the  stocks.  From  their  exile  in  distant 
Babylon  the  religious  leaders  and  prophets  com- 
plained of  his  propaganda  of  non-resistance  and 
recommended  that  the  temple  officers  give  him 
condign  punishment. 

Even  at  his  own  home,  the  priestly  town  of 
Anathoth,  his  life  was  in  danger  and  he  found,  like 
many  another  prophet,  that  a  man's  foes  are  they 
of  his  own  household.  How  his  life  hung  in  the 
balance  when  again  he  predicted  the  downfall  of 
the  temple  is  told  in  inimitable  narrative.  The 
accusers,  the  defendant,  and  the  judges  each 
speak  in  turn. 

Then  spake  the  priests  and  the  prophets  unto  the 
princes  and  to  all  the  people,  saying,  This  man  is 
worthy  of  death;  for  he  hath  prophesied  against  this 
city,  as  ye  have  heard  with  your  ears. 

Then  spake  Jeremiah  unto  all  the  princes  and  to 
all  the  people,  saying,  Jehovah  sent  me  to  prophesy 
against  this  house  and  against  this  city  all  the  words 
that  ye  have  heard.  Now  therefore  amend  your  ways 


AN  UNPOPULAR  PATRIOT  165 

and  your  doings,  and  obey  the  voice  of  Jehovah  your 
God;  and  Jehovah  will  repent  him  of  the  evil  that  he 
hath  pronounced  against  you.  But  as  for  me,  behold, 
I  am  in  your  hand:  do  with  me  as  is  good  and  right  in 
your  eyes.  Only  know  ye  for  certain  that,  if  ye  put 
me  to  death,  ye  will  bring  innocent  blood  upon  your- 
selves, and  upon  this  city,  and  upon  the  inhabitants 
thereof;  for  of  a  truth  Jehovah  hath  sent  me  unto  you 
to  speak  all  these  words  in  your  ears. 

Then  said  the  princes  and  all  the  people  unto  the 
priests  and  to  the  prophets:  This  man  is  not  worthy  of 
death;  for  he  hath  spoken  to  us  in  the  name  of  Jeho- 
vah our  God  (26:11-16). 

Only  through  the  influence  of  Ahikam  and  the 
princes,  and  by  the  elders'  happy  recollection  of 
the  precedent  of  Micah,  more  than  a  hundred 
years  before,  was  Jeremiah  spared.  But  such 
good  fortune  does  not  always  befall  prophets  of 
Jeremiah's  mould.  As  an  ominous  parallel  is 
told  the  fate  of  Uriah,  a  contemporary  prophet 
who  for  similar  "seditious"  utterances  was  extra- 
dited from  Egypt  and  executed  by  Jehoiakim. 
Indeed,  the  same  king  was  prevented  from  inflict- 
ing the  same  fate  on  Jeremiah  and  his  scribe  only 
because,  as  the  historian  puts  it,  "Jehovah  hid 
them." 

The  circumstances  of  this  escape  were  these: 
Prevented,  perhaps  by  special  interdiction,  from 
speaking  in  the  temple,  Jeremiah  devised  a  new 
method  of  publicity.  He  dictated  to  Baruch,  his 
scribe,  the  substance  of  his  consistent  prophetic 


166  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

message  for  many  years  past,  and  then  had  Baruch 
read  the  prophecies  aloud  on  a  fast-day  to  the 
multitudes  gathered  in  the  temple.  The  princes, 
when  informed  of  this  proceeding,  first  examined 
the  writing  themselves  and  then  reported  the 
matter  to  the  king.  So  the  king  had  the  roll 
brought  and  read  in  his  presence,  but  instead  of 
repenting  at  the  threatened  destruction  of  his 
city,  he  destroyed  the  book,  cutting  off  and  burn- 
ing it  piece  by  piece  as  it  was  read,  and  he  tried 
to  complete  the  suppression  of  its  unpopular  mes- 
sage by  destroying  its  authors. 

That  Zedekiah  treated  Jeremiah  more  leniently 
than  his  predecessor  appears  to  be  due  rather  to 
the  superstitiousness  of  the  king  than  to  any 
cowardice  of  the  prophet,  for  now  "the  princes 
were  wroth  with  Jeremiah  and  smote  him  and  put 
him  in  prison  in  the  house  of  Jonathan  the  scribe," 
whence  he  was  later  transferred  to  the  court  of 
the  guard.  Once  Zedekiah  weakly  surrendered 
him  to  the  will  of  the  princes  who  cast  him  into  a 
dungeon  of  mire,  only  to  be  rescued  by  the  kindly 
intercession  of  an  Ethiopian  eunuch.  Finally 
Zedekiah  promised  to  save  Jeremiah  from  those 
who  sought  his  life,  and  "Jeremiah  abode  in  the 
court  of  the  guard  until  the  day  that  Jerusalem 
was  taken." 

If  the  outer  experiences  of  Jeremiah  are  inter- 
esting, still  more  so  are  the  inner  conflicts  of  his 
mind.  Shy  and  sensitive  in  his  personal  relations, 


AN  UNPOPULAR  PATRIOT  167 

deeply  patriotic  and  loyal  to  his  country,  funda- 
mentally optimistic  in  his  faith,  it  was  laid  upon 
him  to  be  an  object  of  universal  scorn,  abuse,  and 
indignation  and  the  herald  of  national  disaster. 
The  form  of  Jeremiah's  message  was  political 
rather  than  religious.  He  was  the  spokesman  of 
a  diminishing  and  persecuted  minority  party,  who 
opposed  the  current  international  policy  of  his 
government,  and  although  the  method  of  his  ad- 
dress— the  monotonous  prediction  of  doom — is 
hardly  the  type  of  political  argument  that  would 
be  effective  to-day,  we  must  recall  that  to  his 
contemporaries  it  was  more  cogent.  His  message 
was  in  accordance  with  the  prevailing  theory  of 
his  day,  that  the  moral  test  of  any  programme  is 
its  practical  success  or  failure,  and  that  the  clear- 
est proof  of  God's  disapproval  of  a  course  is  mis- 
fortune, predicted  or  realized  as  its  result.  The 
religious  view-point  was  the  basis  of  his  political 
advice.  It  was  in  this  that  he  really  differed 
from  the  prophets  who  opposed  him.  They  over- 
looked the  social  crimes,  the  hypocrisy  of  the  for- 
mal worship,  and  based  their  optimism  on  a 
superficial  confidence  in  Jehovah's  partisan  favor 
for  their  nation,  whether  it  was  right  or  whether 
it  was  wrong.  It  was  not  even  long-headed  po- 
litical sagacity  that  guided  Jeremiah.  As  David- 
son says: 

His  assurance  and  announcement  that  Jerusalem 
should  fall  before  the  Chaldeans  was  not  founded  on 


168  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

his  belief  that  so  small  a  power  as  Judah  could  not 
resist  the  Babylonian  empire.  He  had  no  such  idea 
as  that.  The  Babylonian  empire  was  in  Jehovah's 
hands,  as  all  things  else  were.  Jeremiah's  assurance 
was  the  outcome  of  his  profound  conviction  of  the 
people's  sinfulness,  for  which  Jehovah  must  bring  the 
state  to  an  end.  The  optimism  of  the  false  prophets 
was  based  on  their  conception  of  Jehovah's  power;  the 
pessimism  of  the  true  prophets  on  their  conception  of 
his  ethical  being.1 

Indeed,  the  very  pessimism  of  Jeremiah  is  one 
of  the  grounds  of  his  assurance.  He  knows  too 
well  the  subtle  pressure  of  public  opinion  that 
tempts  the  statesman  or  prophet  to  accept  the 
popular  or  optimistic  policy.  But  he  feels  his 
solidarity  with  the  prophets  before  him,  who, 
though  time  may  have  vindicated  them,  seemed 
to  their  contemporaries  traitors  and  pessimists. 
Indeed,  the  presumption  of  truth  is  on  the  side  of 
such  as  these.  It  is  to  Jeremiah  almost  the  proof 
of  a  true  prophet  that  he  is  a  prophet  of  evil. 

And  thereby  Jeremiah  is  freed  from  the  charge 
of  wilful  pessimism  that  so  easily  attaches  to 
men  of  his  position.  He  did  not  desire  the  evil 
that  he  predicted  and  he  did  not  enjoy  predicting 
it.  He  was  not  a  professional  objector  nor  the 
temperamental  champion  of  the  unpopular  side. 
His  love  for  his  country  is  sincere  and  heartfelt, 
though  he  seemed  to  others  a  pro-Chaldean 
traitor.  Sincere,  too,  was  his  personal  suffering 
1  Old  Testament  Prophecy,  p.  305. 


AN  UNPOPULAR  PATRIOT  169 

at  his  loneliness  and  isolation.  The  occasional 
outbursts  of  vengeful  desire  upon  those  who  per- 
secuted him  are  easily  understood,  and  though 
they  place  him  below  the  highest  Christian  ideals, 
they  do  not  invalidate  the  sincerity  and  force  of 
his  anguish  of  soul.  He  knows  himself  "a  man 
of  strife  and  a  man  of  contention  to  the  whole 
earth."  Yet  he  cannot  do  otherwise,  he  cannot 
withhold  a  single  word.1 

Upon  Jeremiah  there  fell  that  unique  sorrow — 
the  sorrow  of  an  unpopular  patriot.  Sharing  all 
the  suffering  of  his  fellow  citizens  in  the  ravages 
of  war  and  siege,  even  to  the  extent  of  voluntary 
self-denial,  he  must  bear  besides  the  intolerable 
burden  of  an  outcast,  misunderstood  and  un- 
heeded, maltreated  and  abused,  and,  above  all, 
falsely  accused  of  disloyalty  and  treason.  No 
wonder  that  he  cursed  the  day  that  he  was  born 
and  prayed  for  vindication.  Yet  out  of  the  cruci- 
ble of  suffering  he  developed  a  strength  of  char- 
acter, a  certainty  of  God,  and  even  a  new  discov- 
ery of  religion  that  have  made  his  name  immortal. 

This  discovery  was  nothing  less  than  a  new 
national  ideal.  For  many  generations  the  men 
of  Israel  had  thought  of  religion  in  ethnic  terms: 
the  unit  was  the  state.  Jeremiah  inherited  this 
ancient  conception.  He  symbolically  identified 
himself  with  the  sufferings  of  his  nation.  His 
whole  being  was  filled  with  such  a  passion  for  cor- 
ijer.  20:7-10. 


170  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

porate  righteousness  as  we  to-day,  with  our  traiti- 
ing  in  individualism,  have  only  lately  begun  to 
appreciate  with  the  awakened  social  conscience 
of  our  time  and  the  religious  vindication  of  na- 
tional policies  required  by  a  world  war.  But  to 
a  Hebrew  prophet  the  collective  outlook  was 
natural,  the  novelty  of  Jeremiah's  thought — a 
novelty  due,  perhaps,  to  his  own  unique  isolation 
within  his  state — was  the  discovery  of  the  indi- 
vidual in  religion. 

The  climax  of  the  Book  of  Jeremiah  and  per- 
haps the  climax  of  all  Hebrew  religion  is  the 
promise  of  the  new  covenant.  Among  the  doleful 
warnings  of  the  prophet — jeremiads,  as  we  call 
them — occur  a  few  such  hopeful  strains.  It  is  a 
new  covenant  to  replace  the  covenant  at  Sinai, 
but  expressed  in  terms  of  personal  knowledge  of 
God  and  inward  authority: 

I  will  put  my  law  in  their  inward  parts,  and  in  their 
heart  will  I  write  it;  and  I  will  be  their  God,  and  they 
shall  be  my  people.  And  they  shall  teach  no  more 
every  man  his  neighbor,  and  every  man  his  brother, 
saying,  Know  Jehovah;  for  they  shall  all  know  me, 
from  the  least  of  them  to  the  greatest  (31:33,  34). 

Thus  the  individualism  of  Jeremiah  is  at  once 
the  successor  and  the  supplement  of  the  old 
nationalism.  The  outlook  is  still  national,  but 
out  of  the  burning  pangs  of  his  solitary  sorrow  it 


AN  UNPOPULAR  PATRIOT  171 

gained  a  depth  and  meaning  that  were  unknown 
before.     As  Peake  has  said: 

The  religion  remains  the  religion  of  Israel,  a  national 
religion.  God  and  Israel  are  still  the  contracting  par- 
ties to  the  New  Covenant  as  to  the  Old.  But  the  in- 
dividualism which  characterized  the  New  made  the 
religion  national  in  a  sense  unattainable  under  the 
Old.  For  when  the  religion  rested  on  external  guar- 
antees and  was  expressed  in  external  institutions, 
while  its  laws  were  imposed  by  an  external  authority, 
when,  moreover,  the  people  was  contemplated  as  a 
unit,  without  reference  to  the  individuals  of  whom  it 
was  composed,  then  it  was  national,  but  in  a  general 
and  superficial  sense.  Only  when  every  individual  in 
the  mass  is  renewed  in  heart  and  his  will  brought  into 
harmony  with  the  Divine  will,  can  the  nation  itself  be 
truly  called  religious.  Through  its  individualism  the 
religion  first  became  national  in  the  full  sense  of  the 
term.1 

Amid  the  conflicting  voices  of  international  and 
party  strife  Jeremiah,  the  prophet  of  Anathoth, 
still  challenges  us  by  his  unwavering  fidelity  to 
the  voice  of  conscience.  He  calls  us  to  advocate 
without  compromise  the  highest  ideals  for  our 
nation,  even  in  the  face  of  contumely  and  mis- 
understanding. He  recalls  us  from  the  impersonal 
concepts  of  party  and  race  and  nation  to  our  own 
soul  and  the  souls  of  our  neighbors,  and,  above 
all,  he  reminds  us  that  only  through  the  direct 
1  Century  Bible,  "Jeremiah,"  vol.  I,  pp.  45  jf. 


172  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

and  spontaneous  response  of  individuals  to  the 
righteousness  which  exalteth  a  nation  can  the 
kingdoms  of  the  world  become  the  Kingdom  of 
God. 


XVIII 

NATIONAL  IDEALS  IN  DISASTER 

EXCEPT  victory,  hopeless  disaster  is  the  sever- 
est test  that  can  befall  a  nation's  ideals,  and  this 
was  the  test  that  Judah  faced  in  the  opening  dec- 
ades of  the  sixth  century.  After  two  hundred 
years  of  more  or  less  nominal  vassalage  to  Assyria 
and  Babylon,  the  political  framework  of  Judaism 
was  at  last  destroyed.  The  flower  of  the  nation 
was  carried  into  captivity.  The  city  and  its  walls 
were  levelled  to  the  ground.  The  native  peasant- 
ry that  remained  were  at  best  the  offscourings 
of  the  people.  They  lived  in  a  state  of  disorgani- 
zation and  terror.  Many  of  them,  haunted  by 
fear  and  memories  of  the  siege,  fled  into  the  land 
of  Egypt,  hoping  there  to  "see  no  war,  nor  hear 
the  sound  of  the  trumpet,  nor  have  hunger  of 
bread."  The  final  remnant  lived  in  want,  amid 
the  chaos  of  constant  petty  intrigues  and  subject 
to  the  terrorism  of  hostile  neighbors,  who  satisfied 
their  long-standing  animosities  by  preying  upon 
them  in  their  weakness. 

The  incurable  grief  of  these  miserable  survivors 
is  vividly  portrayed  in  the  Book  of  Lamentations. 
The  horrors  of  famine  and  death  are  not  merely 
past  but  present,  sorrow  and  tears  are  still  their 

173 


174  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

portion,  the  joy  of  their  heart  is  ceased,  their 
dance  is  turned  into  mourning.  Yet  vivid  as  are 
these  pictures  of  contemporary  want,  and  spon- 
taneous as  are  the  outbursts  of  grief,  they  are  al- 
ready reduced  to  permanent  liturgy.  Four  out 
of  five  of  the  elegiac  poems  of  Lamentations  are 
cast  in  the  form  of  alphabetic  acrostics,  by  which 
device  they  have  been  remembered  and  recited 
by  Jews  unto  this  day.  Thus  with  the  fall  of 
Jerusalem  a  permanent  note  of  sadness  entered 
the  literature,  the  religion,  and  the  national  life 
of  the  Hebrews: 

"0  wall  of  the  daughter  of  Zion, 
Let  tears  run  down  like  a  river  day  and  night; 
Give  thyself  no  respite;  let  not  the  apple  of  thine  eye 

cease; 
Arise,  cry  out  in  the  night,  at  the  beginning  of  the 

watches; 
Pour  out  thy  heart  like  water  before  the  face  of  the 

Lord: 
Lift  up  thy  hands  toward  him  for  the  life  of  thy 

young  children, 
That  faint  for  hunger  at  the  head  of  every  street." 

"  Is  it  nothing  to  you,  all  ye  that  pass  by  ? 
Behold,  and  see  if  there  be  any  sorrow  like  unto  my 
sorrow."  l 

Another  natural  reaction  from  disaster  was  the 
desire  for  revenge.     Among  all  the  sorrows  of 
defeat  and  want  none  cut  the  heart  to  the  quick 
i Lam.  2:18, 19;  1:12. 


IN  DISASTER  175 

like  the  triumph  of  old  foes.  The  Hebrews  were 
fully  conscious  of  this  malicious  joy.1  There  was 
Ammon  that  cried,  "Aha/'  against  Jehovah's 
"sanctuary,  when  it  was  profaned;  and  against 
the  land  of  Israel,  when  it  was  made  desolate;  and 
against  the  house  of  Judah,  when  they  went  into 
captivity."  2  There  was  Edom,  Israel's  brother, 
who  "stood  aloof  in  the  day  that  strangers  car- 
ried away  his  substance"  and  said  of  Jerusalem, 
"Rase  it,  rase  it,  even  to  the  foundation  thereof."8 
There  was  Tyre,  intent  only  on  commerce,  whose 
first  thought  about  Israel's  disaster  was,  "I  shall 
be  replenished,  now  that  she  is  laid  waste."4 
And  finally  there  was  Babylon  itself — the  arch- 
enemy, and  ruthless  agent  of  destruction — proud, 
boastful,  "wanton  as  a  heifer  that  treadeth  out 
the  grain,"  blasphemous  against  Jehovah,  yet 
hypocritically  justifying  its  own  excesses  against 
the  Hebrews  by  saying,  "We  are  not  guilty,  be- 
cause they  have  sinned  against  Jehovah."8 

Both  in  anticipation  and  in  retrospect  the 
retribution  of  Babylon  filled  the  Hebrews  with 
vengeful  joy.  The  Psalmist,  weeping  when  he 
remembered  Zion,  cries: 

"O  daughter  of  Babylon,  that  art  to  be  destroyed, 
Happy  shall  he  be,  that  rewardeth  thee 
As  thou  hast  served  us. 

1  Lam.  1 :21 ;  2 : 16.  *  Ezek.  25 :3. 

« Obad.  11 ;  Psalms  137:7.  « Ezek.  26:2. 

•Jer.  50:7, 11. 


176  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

Happy  shall  he  be,  that  taketh  and  dasheth  thy 

little  ones 
Against  the  rock."  x 

So,  also,  the  prophet,  in  an  ode  of  triumph,  pic- 
tures the  humiliation  of  the  relentless  empire — 
the  welcome  to  Sheol  of  the  king  who  thought  to 
make  himself  like  the  Most  High,  and  the  desola- 
tion of  the  city  with  a  destruction  like  that  of 
Sodom  and  Gomorrah.2  "Fallen,  fallen  is  Baby- 
lon," is  the  exultant  cry  that  rises  from  hearts 
once  full  of  anguish  and  despair,  and  it  has  echoed 
as  a  cry  of  "  Revanche  1 "  through  the  ages,  until 
it  was  caught  up  in  the  negro  melody  of  emanci- 
pated slaves.3 

This  spirit  of  revenge  is  one  of  the  least  attrac- 
tive elements  in  prophecy  and  psalm,  nor  is  it 
much  disguised  by  the  excuse  of  retaliation  and 
even  of  justice  which  it  claims.  "What  is  sheer 
hate,"  says  Thackeray,  "seems  to  the  individual 
entertaining  the  sentiment  so  like  indignant  vir- 
tue, that  he  often  indulges  in  the  propensity  to 
the  full,  nay,  lauds  himself  for  the  exercise  of  it." 
So  with  Israel.  No  doubt  Babylon  had  played 
the  part  of  a  ruthless  conqueror,  and  retribution 
seemed  a  religious  necessity,  for  at  least  where 
their  enemies  were  concerned  the  Hebrews  be- 
lieved that  "Jehovah  is  a  God  of  recompenses,  he 
will  surely  requite." 

1  Psalms  137:8,  9.         2  Isaiah  13,  14,  21,  47;  Jer.  50,  51. 
» Isaiah  21:9;  Revelation  14:8. 


IN  DISASTER  177 

It  was  inevitable  that  the  loss  of  national  life 
should  decrease  the  national  interests  of  many 
Israelites  and  should  increase  the  individualism 
of  their  thought  and  ambitions.  It  would  be  im- 
possible to  follow  all  the  lines  along  which  the 
exile  stimulated  this  new  emphasis.  In  Babylon 
and  Egypt  especially  the  new  surroundings  and 
the  loss  of  all  political  opportunity  forced  the 
refugees  to  attend  to  their  immediate  personal 
necessities.  Many  of  them  became  absorbed  in 
business,  or  in  the  commercial  life  of  these  wealthy 
and  ancient  civilizations.  In  this  respect  alone 
the  exile  produced  a  most  significant  change  on 
the  outlook  of  the  Hebrews.  For  a  second  time 
their  principal  occupation  had  changed:  as  the 
agriculture  of  Canaan  had  replaced  the  pastoral 
life  of  the  desert,  farming  was  in  turn  supplanted 
by  the  life  of  trade — which  to-day  seems  instinc- 
tive to  the  Hebrews.  Certainly  one  of  the  reac- 
tions from  national  disaster  is  despair  of  ideals, 
and  selfishness  and  materialism  flourished  in  the 
disintegration  of  the  Jewish  nation. 

To  a  certain  extent  religion  was  the  substitute 
for  politics.  As  is  often  said,  the  exile  converted 
a  nation  into  a  church.  From  being  both  church 
and  state  combined,  Judaism  changed,  as  the 
Roman  Catholic  Church  changed  in  the  Middle 
Ages,  to  a  largely  non-political  association.  The 
social  and  political  energies  of  the  people  found 
their  expression  in  a  religious  organization.  The 


178  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

synagogues  took  the  place  of  the  older  judicial 
assemblies.  The  high  priest  was  the  exilic  sub- 
stitute for  the  king.  Debate  and  religious  con- 
troversies were  the  equivalents  for  war.  As  the 
loss  of  Greek  independence  stimulated  the  relig- 
ious and  philosophical  club  life  in  Hellenistic 
Athens,  so  within  Judaism  there  grew  up  new 
local  interests  and  parties  like  the  Pharisees,  that 
were  often  religious  and  philosophical  rather  than 
political.  A  greater  other-worldliness  resulted. 
Some  men  deliberately  held  themselves  aloof  from 
politics.  They  felt  no  hope  or  desire  for  a  re- 
vived national  life,  and  they  watched  the  rise 
and  fall  of  empires  with  an  unconcern  unparal- 
leled in  the  pre-exilic  prophets.  Their  concern 
was  with  religion  alone,  and  if  they  desired  a 
change  of  government,  they  were  willing  to  wait 
for  the  miraculous  intervention  of  God. 

It  is  a  common  statement  that  through  all 
antiquity  the  primary  unit  was  the  nation. 
Though  we  must  admit,  with  Professor  Knudson,1 
the  presence  of  individualism  in  pre-exilic  Israel, 
we  cannot  deny  the  national  view-point  of  the 
bulk  of  pre-exilic  literature.  The  fall  of  Jerusa- 
lem is  a  landmark  from  which  to  trace  the  growth 
of  Hebrew  individualism.  Heretofore  the  sub- 
merging of  the  individual  in  the  body  politic  had 
been  unconscious  rather  than  reasoned.  Now  it 
was  challenged,  explained,  or  denied.  The  new 

1  The  Religious  Teaching  of  the  Old  Testament,  pp.  331  ff. 


IN  DISASTER  179 

religion  already  emerging  in  Ezekiel  and  Jeremiah 
is  personal.  Each  man  is  in  direct  relation  to 
God.  His  guilt  is  his  own — apart  from  the  sins 
of  his  ancestors  or  fellow  countrymen.  Ezekiel 
denied  the  proverbial  expression  of  hereditary 
guilt — "the  fathers  have  eaten  sour  grapes  and 
the  children's  teeth  are  set  on  edge."  Even  the 
fate  and  hope  of  the  individual  were  divorced  from 
those  of  the  state.  And  it  may  be  that  from  the 
darkest  hours  of  national  despair  was  born  the 
hope  not  only  for  a  restored  nation  but  for  the 
survival  of  the  individual  life  even  beyond  the 
gates  of  death. 

There  were  many  Hebrews  whose  thought  con- 
cerning the  disaster  of  their  nation  was  not  satis- 
fied by  these  most  obvious  reactions.  Such  an 
event  demanded  some  deeper  causal  explanation. 
How  could  the  God  of  Israel — a  just  God — per- 
mit such  a  calamity  ?  A  very  simple  explanation 
was  forthcoming.  According  to  the  popular  phil- 
osophy all  evil  is  the  punishment  for  sin,  and 
therefore  disaster  is  the  obvious  evidence  and 
proof  of  national  guilt.  Men  who  had  not  been 
sensible  of  their  guilt  before,  now  accepted  this 
explanation  and  began  to  recall  and  test  their 
past.  The  prophets  had  complained  of  the  peo- 
ple's sin  all  along,  and,  sharing  the  popular  philos- 
ophy, had  predicted  just  such  punishment.  For 
them  the  disaster  was  no  puzzle,  it  was  only  the 
confirmation  of  their  words.  And  so  the  prophets 


180  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

secured  greater  respect  than  ever  before.  Men 
built  the  sepulchres  of  those  whom  their  fathers 
had  killed.  The  prophets'  sermons  were  recalled 
and  carefully  preserved.  Their  precepts,  as  em- 
bodied in  the  law  of  Deuteronomy,  became  the 
sacred  bond  of  national  life,  while  their  philosophy 
of  history  was  adopted  as  the  framework  for  the 
editing  of  the  records  of  the  past.  With  quick- 
ened hindsight  it  was  seen  that  in  the  perspective 
of  time  the  fall  of  the  state  was  not  an  isolated  or 
unprepared  for  calamity.  It  was  the  result  of 
repeated  and  cumulative  transgressions,  through- 
out the  whole  history  of  the  Hebrew  monarchy. 
Even  in  the  oldest  period  of  their  national  life 
the  same  law  of  moral  cause  and  effect  was  dis- 
covered and  the  primitive  stories  of  the  Judges 
fell  into  the  simple  framework: 

And  the  children  of  Israel  again  did  that  which  was 
evil  in  the  sight  of  Jehovah;  and  Jehovah  delivered 
them  into  the  hand  of x  years. 

Thus  there  came  to  the  Hebrew  people  with 
the  exile  a  benumbing  and  oppressive  sense  of 
guilt.  Their  punishment  was  well  deserved,  and 
although  in  time  they  came  to  hope  that  repen- 
tance would  win  pardon,  or  that  a  double  punish- 
ment would  be  followed  by  release,  the  shadow 
of  guilt  fell  forever  across  the  lights  of  hope  and 
promise.  As  Knudson  says: 


IN  DISASTER  181 

The  national  humiliation  and  suffering  that  followed 
from  the  fall  of  Jerusalem  brought  home  to  the  people 
a  consciousness  of  sin  such  as  they  had  not  had  before. 
The  book  of  Lamentations  illustrates  this,  and  so  does 
the  whole  post-exilic  priestly  system.  ...  In  ancient 
Judaism  there  was  a  sense  of  world-weariness.  The 
nation  had  been  defeated  in  its  political  aims.  Self- 
assertion,  it  was  now  felt,  could  yield  but  little.  If 
the  hopes  of  the  devout  Israelite  were  to  be  realized,  it 
could  be  only  by  a  marvellous  divine  intervention. 
The  thing  to  do,  consequently,  was  not  to  devote  one- 
self to  a  positive  programme  of  social  amelioration,  but 
to  remove  the  obstacles  to  the  coming  of  the  kingdom 
of  God.  The  ethical  life  thus  took  a  negative  turn. 
It  found  its  satisfaction  in  repentance  from  sin  rather 
than  in  achievement  and  self-realization.1 

Not  all  Hebrews,  however,  accepted  the  simple 
explanation  that  their  national  disaster  was  a 
punishment.  Not  only  had  it  included  the  inno- 
cent with  the  guilty,  but  even  when  the  nation 
was  taken  as  a  unit,  it  was  possible  to  conceive 
its  past  more  favorably  than  Jeremiah  and  Eze- 
kiel  were  inclined  to  do.  Under  Josiah  a  united 
effort  had  been  made  to  purify  the  religion  of 
Israel  according  to  prophetic  standards.  In  fact, 
to  some  of  Jeremiah's  contemporaries,  unfaithful- 
ness to  the  queen  of  heaven  rather  than  to  Jeho- 

1  The  Religious  Teaching  of  the  Old  Testament,  pp.  254,  257. 
While  the  situation  to-day  in  America  is  different,  and  many 
Christians  hold  the  reverse  view-point,  the  emphasis  upon 
sin,  the  expectation  of  a  divine  coup  d'etat,  and  the  negative 
attitude  toward  social  religion  are  well  illustrated  by  certain 
evangelistic  and  millenarian  schools  of  thought. 


182  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

vah  seemed  the  cause  of  their  disaster.1  And 
many  men  of  unclouded  conscience  and  prophetic 
sympathies  felt  that  the  nation  was  relatively 
innocent.  Thus  there  arose  the  eternal  problem 
of  evil,  not  only  as  an  individual  problem,  but  as 
a  problem  for  the  nation.  Why  do  the  right- 
eous people  suffer?  In  neither  the  personal  nor 
the  national  problem  did  Hebrew  thought  reach 
a  scientific  theodicy,  but  its  struggle  with  the 
problem  produced  the  most  exalted  reaches  of 
Hebrew  literature.  The  personal  problem  is 
dealt  with  in  the  Book  of  Job,  and  leads,  as  we 
have  said,  to  a  faith  in  the  future  life.  On  the 
national  side  the  answer  was  suggested  princi- 
pally along  the  lines  of  future  promise.  The  suf- 
ferings of  Israel  are  not  so  much  the  measure  of 
past  guilt  as  of  future  reward.  Return,  restora- 
tion, and  ultimate  glory  will  cancel  the  present 
distress.  Only  be  patient.  "Though  it  tarry, 
wait  for  it,  because  it  will  surely  come,  it  will  not 
delay/'2  What  is  commonly  called  "the  Mes- 
sianic Hope"  owes  its  emphasis,  if  not  its  origin, 
to  this  interpretation  of  the  exile. 

The  second  solution  of  national  distress  was 
even  more  sublime.  To  at  least  one  Hebrew  of 
the  exile  came  the  idea  of  its  vicarious  and  re- 
demptive service.  He  saw  that  Israel's  suffer- 
ings were  not  for  its  own  sins  only,  but  for  the 
sins  of  many,  and  thus  through  the  path  of  sor- 

Uer.  44:15-19.  «Hab.2:3. 


IN  DISASTER  183 

row  his  nation  would  bring  light  and  healing  to 
all  the  world.  Thus,  while  most  of  the  effects  of 
the  exile  seem,  from  the  view-point  of  national 
ideals,  negative  and  unproductive,  along  these 
two  lines  of  development  it  did  contribute  ele- 
ments of  permanent  value.  To  these  two  ideals 
we  must  return  in  separate  chapters. 


XIX 

IDEALS   OF  RECONSTRUCTION 

THE  Old  Testament  contains  an  unexpected 
amount  of  what  we  should  call  nowadays  "litera- 
ture of  reconstruction."  The  primary  occasion 
of  such  writings  was  the  fall  of  Jerusalem  in 
586  B.  c.  Though  the  prevailing  reaction  from 
that  disaster  was  at  first  prostrate  hopelessness, 
there  were  men  in  both  Judah  and  Babylon  who 
soon  rallied  from  defeat  and  turned  their  thoughts 
from  the  past  to  the  future.  But  their  time  of 
waiting  was  prolonged  and  the  aspirations  for 
new  national  life,  instead  of  finding  fulfilment 
immediately  after  disaster,  as  it  is  hoped  will  be 
the  case  in  modern  Belgium  and  Serbia,  were 
maintained,  as  was  done  in  Poland  and  Finland, 
throughout  many  years  of  subjection.  For  two 
generations,  until  the  accession  of  Cyrus,  they 
waited  for  the  first  chance  to  undertake  the  task 
of  reconstruction.  The  delay  was  irksome,  but  it 
only  strengthened  the  force  of  their  constructive 
ideals.  It  gave  them  time  to  consider  their  pro- 
gramme. It  made  their  memory  of  past  inde- 
pendence and  prosperity  so  remote  as  to  be  easily 
idealized.  It  made  their  hope  for  the  future  soon 
transcend  the  simpler  expectations  of  a  return  to 
184 


RECONSTRUCTION  185 

the  status  quo  ante.  It  gave  them  an  opportunity 
to  start  de  novo,  to  avoid  the  old  ruts,  and  to 
build  more  nearly  to  the  heart's  desire.  There 
are  clear  evidences  that,  in  the  absolute  break 
with  the  past  provided  by  the  Hebrew  exile,  cer- 
tain permanent  changes  actually  occurred  in  the 
national  life.  But  "hope  deferred"  had  become 
a  hope  glorified  beyond  any  possibility  of  fulfil- 
ment. And  so  it  never  died  or  ceased  to  grow. 
Even  at  their  periods  of  greatest  prosperity  and 
achievement  the  Hebrews  were  filled  with  a  holy 
discontent.  They  had  learned  once  for  all  to 
look  for  a  better  city.  Like  the  fleeing  Italy  of 
the  Mneidy  their  aspiration  became  a  permanent 
attitude  of  their  later  history. 

For  this  reason  it  is  impossible  to  limit  the  re- 
construction literature  of  Judaism  to  the  round 
seventy  years  which  Jeremiah  promised  as  the 
period  of  Babylonian  control.  It  includes  many 
passages  of  unquestionably  later  date.  Even  such 
fulfilment  of  the  national  hope  as  was  achieved 
under  Zerubbabel  in  the  sixth  century,  under 
Nehemiah  in  the  fifth  century,  and  under  the 
Maccabees  in  the  second  century  before  Christ, 
prolonged  the  need  for  cultivating  these  aspira- 
tions and  for  facing  the  problems  of  reconstruc- 
tion. The  Messianic  hope  of  the  apocalyptic 
writers  and  even  of  political  agitators  in  the  first 
Christian  era  shows  the, persistence  of  the  recon- 
struction ideal. 


186  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

There  is  some  evidence,  also,  that  the  hope  of 
restoration  preceded  as  well  as  followed  the  actual 
span  of  the  exile.  There  are  many  passages  in 
the  eighth-century  prophets  which  predict  return, 
revival,  or  restoration.  It  is  customary  with 
scholars  to  reject  these  as  later  interpolations, 
and  to  limit  the  genuine  prophecies  of  the  future 
to  those  which  foretell  doom.  Such  a  wholesale 
method  of  criticism  can  hardly  be  justified,  tand 
even  though  many  of  these  passages  be  excluded, 
there  still  remain  in  the  pre-exilic  prophets  some 
very  probable  suggestions  of  a  hopeful  outlook. 
There  is  nothing  inconsistent  in  assigning  to  the 
same  prophet  promises  both  of  blessing  and  of 
punishment.  It  seems,  therefore,  quite  probable 
that  the  hopes  of  the  exilic  Jews  were  not  a  new 
creation  of  their  disaster,  but  were  based  on 
earlier  ideals  that  can  be  traced  back,  if  not  to 
Egyptian  and  Babylonian  ideals  of  the  Golden 
Age,  at  least  to  Isaiah's  belief  in  the  salvation  of 
a  remnant  and  to  other  elements  inherent  in  the 
Hebrew  view-point  under  the  monarchy.1  Cer- 
tainly those  prophets  who  spoke  just  before  the 
city's  destruction  already  felt  the  probability  of 
restoration.  Thus  Jeremiah,  though  he  vigor- 
ously contradicts  the  optimism  of  Hananiah,  who 
predicted  the  immediate  destruction  of  the  Baby- 
lonian yoke,  nevertheless  promises  at  a  more  dis- 

lSee  Knudson,  Religious  Teaching  of  the  Old  Testament, 
Chapter  XV,  "The  Messianic  Hope.", 


RECONSTRUCTION  187 

tant  date  return  and  restoration.  The  same  ex- 
pectation appears  in  EzekiePs  famous  vision  of 
the  Valley  of  Dry  Bones. 

For  this  and  for  other  reasons  it  was  natural 
that  when  the  crisis  had  really  come  the  prophets 
should  be  the  leaders  in  reviving  national  hope. 
They  and  their  predecessors  had  been  vindicated 
in  their  prediction  of  disaster.  In  the  revulsion 
of  feeling  that  followed  the  failure  of  the  dominant 
anti-Babylonian  party,  they  secured  the  inevita- 
ble prestige  that  comes  to  the  minority  party. 
Formerly  Jeremiah  and  Ezekiel  were  branded  as 
traitors,  now  they  were  respected  as  the  expo- 
nents of  an  alternative  policy  that  might  have 
met  with  success.  They  had  not  been  absorbed 
in  the  fatal  policy  of  resistance,  which  had  brought 
the  other  leaders  into  disrepute;  they  had  been 
free  to  observe  events  at  leisure  and  to  formulate 
a  policy  and  an  attitude  to  the  future.  The 
problem  of  reconstruction  had  not  found  them 
unprepared.  Though  they  had  striven  with  all 
their  zeal  to  avert  the  disaster  in  the  only  way 
that  could  be  effective — the  preaching  of  their 
unpopular  social  and  international  programme, 
when  the  disaster  was  upon  them  they  refrained 
from  mere  recriminations  of  conscious  innocence 
and  the  futile  "I  told  you  so,"  and  devoted  them- 
selves to  the  reconstruction  of  national  morale. 
So  by  a  natural  reaction  the  disappointed  nation 
turned  to  the  prophets  for  advice  and  guidance, 


188  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

and  not  to  the  living  prophets  only,  but  to  those 
who  were  dead.  The  fragmentary  remains  of 
the  older  sermons  were  carefully  collected  and 
edited  and  fitted  with  many  interpretations  for 
the  new  world.  From  such  an  epoch  of  prophetic 
appreciation  arose  the  hope  for  a  prophetic  re- 
vival, for  the  return  of  the  reformer  prophet, 
Elijah,  or  for  one  greater  than  all  the  prophets. 

The  vindication  of  the  political  programme  of 
the  prophets  meant  the  vindication  of  their  moral 
standards  as  well.  The  punishment  had  come  as 
the  prophets  expected;  it  was  natural  to  accept 
the  prophets'  explanation  of  its  cause.  The  re- 
newed sense  of  guilt  that  now  stirred  the  nation 
was  the  popular  confession  of  the  justice  of  the 
reformer's  earlier  demands.  Now  at  last  the  na- 
tion was  prepared  to  give  them  a  trial:  "Let  us 
search  and  try  our  ways,  and  turn  again  to  Jeho- 
vah." It  is  of  the  utmost  significance  that  in 
the  chaos  which  followed  the  fall  of  the  Hebrew 
nation,  the  constructive  leadership  came  to  the 
prophetic  group.  This  fact  gave  to  the  recon- 
struction ideals  that  emphasis  upon  spiritual  and 
moral  reconstruction  which  fills  the  resultant  lit- 
erature. For  the  real  crisis  in  the  nation's  history 
proved  to  be  not  its  hour  of  defeat,  but  the  suc- 
ceeding formative  years  when  its  power  of  rally- 
ing was  so  severely  tested. 

The  basis  of  the  prophets'  hope  was  religious. 
It  was  not  a  mere  forecast  of  probable  political 


RECONSTRUCTION  189 

changes,  but  an  assurance  of  faith.  While  other 
men  were  lost  in  despair,  the  courage  and  opti- 
mism of  the  prophets  were  grounded  on  their  trust 
in  God.  Nowhere  is  the  theological  basis  of  na- 
tional optimism  more  effectively  expressed  than 
in  Second  Isaiah.  God  is  the  protagonist  of  his- 
tory. Israel  is  only  his  servant  and  witness, 
Cyrus  is  his  tool  and  agent.  The  power  of  God 
is  assured  from  nature,  from  prehistoric  mythol- 
ogy, from  history,  and  from  comparative  religion 
and  divination.  It  is  he  that  cut  Rahab  to 
pieces  in  the  days  of  old,  "that  measured  the 
waters  in  the  hollow  of  his  hand,  and  meted  out 
heaven  with  the  span,"  "that  bringeth  princes 
to  nothing,  that  maketh  the  judges  of  the  earth 
as  vanity,"  "that  sitteth  above  the  circle  of  the 
earth,  and  the  inhabitants  thereof  are  as  grass- 
hoppers." Before  him  "the  nations  are  as  a 
drop  of  a  bucket,  and  are  accounted  as  the  small 
dust  of  the  balance."  The  other  gods  are  mere 
stocks  and  stones  compared  with  him,  "their 
molten  images  are  wind  and  confusion."  They 
are  powerless  to  help  their  worshippers,  or  to 
guide  them  with  mantic  forecasts  of  the  future. 
Jehovah's  favor  for  Israel  is  shown  through  its 
past.  He  made  a  great  nation  from  Abraham; 
he  can  make  a  great  nation  out  of  the  feeble 
remnant  of  Judah.  He  saved  Israel  out  of  Egypt, 
he  can  also  redeem  them  now  from  Babylon. 
Then  he  dried  up  the  sea  and  made  rivers  in  a 


190  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

wilderness;  now  he  "will  make  a  way  in  the  wil- 
derness and  rivers  in  the  desert."  Though  Israel 
was  a  transgressor  from  the  womb,  though  their 
first  father  sinned,  God  will  blot  out  their  trans- 
gressions and  will  not  remember  their  sins.  He 
has  refined  them  but  not  as  silver,  he  has  tried 
them  in  the  furnace  of  affliction.  He  has  chosen 
them  for  his  service  to  bear  his  salvation  to  the 
ends  of  the  earth.  All  this  he  will  do  for  his  own 
name's  sake,  as  the  expression  of  his  righteous 
character.  He  has  foretold  the  things  that  have 
come  to  pass;  now  he  declares  a  new  thing  and 
it  also  shall  be  accomplished.  These  are  the 
themes  that  repeatedly  occur  in  the  exquisite 
lyric  songs  of  the  prophet  of  the  restoration. 
These  are  the  basis  of  his  assurance  and  hope. 

It  is  not  possible  here  to  review  all  the  forms 
which  the  restoration  ideals  assumed,  or  to  enu- 
merate all  the  longer  and  shorter  passages  in 
which  they  were  expressed.  Beside  the  poetic 
masterpiece  of  the  prophet  of  the  restoration, 
contained  in  Isaiah  40-55,  both  earlier  chapters 
(as  34,  35)  and  the  whole  later  part  of  the  book 
seem  to  deal  with  the  same  general  problem. 
All  the  preaching  of  Ezekiel  falls  after  the  first 
disaster  of  Jerusalem  in  597  B.  c.,  and  the  whole 
latter  part  of  this  volume  suggests  a  date  after 
the  final  desolation.  Of  the  sermons  of  Jeremiah, 
four  chapters,  30-33,  appear  to  contain  his  chief 
prophesies  of  restoration.  Of  the  "minor  proph- 


RECONSTRUCTION  191 

ets,"  Zechariah,  Haggai,  and  Malachi  deal  most 
directly  with  the  same  subject. 

To  many  Jews  repatriation  seemed  the  pre- 
requisite of  national  restoration.  It  is  perhaps 
for  that  reason  that  the  general  amnesty  for 
exiles  offered  by  Cyrus  inspired  such  enthusiasm 
in  prospect  as  we  find  in  Second  Isaiah,  and  such 
magnified  importance  in  the  retrospect  of  the 
Chronicler.  For  those  in  Babylon  it  meant  their 
own  return  to  the  land  of  happy  memory,  to 
Jerusalem  unforgotten  and  preferred  above  their 
chief  joy.  For  those  in  Judah  it  meant  the  re- 
population  of  the  desolate  cities  and  the  blossom- 
ing of  the  deserted  fields  and  vineyards  with  the 
return  of  agricultural  care.  The  songs  of  Zion 
that  could  not  be  sung  for  sorrow  in  a  foreign, 
land  re-echo  through  the  lyric  melody  of  the 
prophet  as  he  pictures  this  return: 

"The  ransomed  of  Jehovah  shall  return, 
And  come  with  singing  unto  Zion, 
And  everlasting  joy  shall  be  upon  their  heads"  (51:11). 

"Break  forth  into  joy,  sing  together, 
Ye  waste  places  of  Jerusalem; 
For  Jehovah  hath  comforted  his  people, 
He  hath  redeemed  Jerusalem"  (52:9). 

"Jehovah  hath  comforted  Zion; 
He  hath  comforted  all  her  waste  places, 
And  hath  made  her  wilderness  like  Eden, 
And  her  desert  like  the  garden  of  Jehovah; 
Joy  and  gladness  shall  be  found  therein, 
Thanksgiving,  and  the  voice  of  melody"  (51:3). 


192  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

"Lo,  these  shall  come  from  far; 
And,  lo,  these  from  the  north  and  from  the  west; 
And  these  from  the  land  of  Sinim.  .  .  . 
The  children  of  thy  bereavement  shall  yet  say  in 

thine  ears, 

The  place  is  too  strait  for  me; 
Give  place  to  me  that  I  may  dwell"  (49:12,  20). 

Zion  is  represented  as  a  widow,  once  desolate  and 
childless,  now  rejoicing  as  her  children  are '  re- 
stored from  the  four  corners  of  the  earth.  They 
will  find  the  circuit  of  the  city  too  small  to  con- 
tain the  teeming  population. 

Sometimes  the  hope  for  the  future  is  expressed 
in  terms  of  economic  prosperity.  The  soil  will 
bear  richly  at  home;  and  from  abroad  will  be 
brought  either  as  imports  or  as  tribute  the  wealth 
of  the  fabled  East.  All  other  forms  of  happiness 
color  the  picture.  Sorrow  and  disease  shall  dis- 
appear, the  life  of  men  shall  be  prolonged  beyond 
the  three  score  years  and  ten.  Even  nature  shall 
be  miraculously  changed. 

As  was  natural  after  years  of  distress  from  civil 
and  foreign  war,  the  hope  of  peace  played  a  prom- 
inent part  in  the  thought  of  Jewish  Utopians. 
Though  some  were  inclined  to  base  their  hopes 
for  security  on  restored  defense  and  the  use  of 
the  sword,  to  many  had  come  the  dream  of  uni- 
versal disarmament  and  permanent  peace. 

"They  shall  beat  their  swords  into  ploughshares, 
And  their  spears  into  pruning-hooks; 


RECONSTRUCTION  193 

Nation  shall  not  lift  up  sword  against  nation, 
Neither  shall  they  learn  war  any  more."1 

Of  course  even  the  most  international  ideals 
are  never  entirely  free  from  the  national  bias.  In 
the  Golden  Age  Israel  is  to  have  the  real  sover- 
eignty, Jehovah  is  to  be  the  international  arbi- 
trator, Judaism  is  to  become  the  universal  relig- 
ion. Nevertheless  the  nucleus  of  a  more  neu- 
tral internationalism  is  to  be  found  in  the  spirit 
and  method  by  which  such  supremacy  is  antici- 
pated. 

There  were  many  persons  whose  interest  in 
restoration  was  centred  in  the  domestic  political 
problems.  The  restoration  of  the  house  of  David, 
the  proper  adjustment  of  judicial  authority,  the 
codification  of  civil  law,  were  their  concerns.  They 
were  anxious  that  the  best  elements  in  the  earlier 
government  should  be  carefully  preserved  and 
restored. 

A  similar  interest  was  felt  by  many  persons  in 
the  resuscitation  of  the  religious  system.  The 
elaborate  plans  of  Ezekiel,  the  Holiness  Code, 
and  the  later  priestly  outline  of  Levitical  duties 
are  an  expression  of  that  form  of  idealism  that 
trusts  the  machinery  of  religion  as  the  guarantee 
of  national  security.  In  such  a  hope  the  temple 
holds  a  central  place,  and  the  restoration  of  this 
building  in  the  time  of  Haggai  and  Zechariah 

Isaiah  2:2-4  and  Micah  4:1-3.  The  original  date  and 
author  are  uncertain. 


194  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

gave  an  impetus  to  this  conception  which  de- 
scended to  the  priests  and  Sadducees.  Yet  al- 
ways, as  we  have  suggested,  the  moral  resuscita- 
tion is  included  in  the  programmes  for  recon- 
struction. Absolute  reliance  could  not  be  placed 
on  the  most  perfect  panaceas  of  political  or  eccle- 
siastical organization.  A  new  heart  was  required, 
a  new  spirit — the  spirit  of  God  himself  perpetu- 
ally resident  with  men — and  these  were  the  pre- 
requisite of  the  new  song,  the  new  name,  the  new 
heaven  and  the  new  earth.  The  closing  chapters 
of  the  Book  of  Isaiah  show  that  amid  the  ideals 
of  religious  conformity,  of  political  supremacy, 
and  of  economic  prosperity  the  old  spiritual  ideals 
and  social  religion  of  the  prophets  were  still  re- 
tained. Here  is  a  soul  that  is  sensitive  to  the 
sins  of  the  present  as  well  as  the  past,  of  oneself 
as  well  as  of  others,  yet  fully  aware  of  the  possi- 
bilities of  moral  achievement.  The  crowning  ele- 
ment in  such  an  ideal  is  the  awakened  civic  con- 
science, the  commutation  of  ceremony  into  social 
service,  and  the  universalizing  of  righteousness. 
With  words  reminiscent  of  the  International  Ser- 
vant and  prophetic  of  the  beneficent  Christ,  he 
cries: 

"The  Spirit  of  the  Lord  Jehovah  is  upon  me; 
Because  Jehovah  hath  anointed  me  to  preach  good 

tidings  unto  the  meek, 

He  hath  sent  me  to  bind  up  the  broken-hearted, 
To  proclaim  liberty  to  the  captives  [of  war], 


RECONSTRUCTION  195 

And  the  opening  of  prison  to  them  that  are  bound. . . . 

To  comfort  all  that  mourn.  .  .  . 

That  they  may  be  called  trees  of  righteousness, 

The  planting  of  Jehovah,  that  he  may  be  glorified. 

And  they  shall  build  the  old  wastes, 

They  shall  raise  up  the  former  desolations, 

And  they  shall  repair  the  waste  cities, 

The  desolations  of  many  generations"  (61:1-4). 

Such  a  message  is  the  surest  evidence  of  divine 
inspiration  and  the  surest  fulfilment  of  the  eternal 
divine  purpose  of  reconstruction.  Through  such 
passages  one  can  see  the  roots  of  an  indomitable 
optimism  which  has  enabled  the  Jewish  race  to 
endure  unparalleled  persecution  and  disaster,  and 
having  done  all  to  stand.  Out  of  weakness  they 
were  made  strong,  and  they  dedicated  to  all  men 
of  faith  who  followed  them  a  perennial  and  eternal 
hope  in  the  recreative  power  of  God.  In  their 
footsteps  Christ  walked  when  he  proclaimed  at 
Nazareth  his  programme,  and  so  do  his  followers 
to-day,  if  with  moral  insight  and  prophetic  fervor 
they  bend  their  energies  to  the  urgent  tasks  of 
spiritual  reconstruction. 


XX 

ON  INTERNATIONAL  SERVICE 

THE  biographical  stories  and  sermons  of  Isaiah 
of  Jerusalem  are  followed  in  the  book  through 
which  they  have  come  down  to  us  by  a  series  of 
poems  dealing  with  the  reconstruction  era  of  Jew- 
ish history.  And  among  these  later  poems 
scholars  have  recognized  a  group  of  passages  so 
distinct  in  subject  and  manner  that,  whether  they 
were  originally  part  of  their  present  context  or 
not,  they  seem  to  deserve  separate  consideration. 
These  brief  songs,  culminating  in  the  familiar 
fifty-third  chapter  of  Isaiah,  all  deal  with  the 
same  figure — the  servant  of  Jehovah.1  They  de- 
scribe his  training  and  his  method  and  the  aston- 
ishing results  of  his  career.  It  is  easy  to  imagine 
in  the  successive  songs  a  natural  development  of 
the  thought,  or  at  least  a  logical  progress  in  pre- 
senting it.  And  while  the  language  is  no  less 
poetic  and  sublime  than  in  the  other  parts  of  this 
prophecy,  these  sections  offer  not  only  a  separate 
literary  problem  of  their  own,  but  an  interpreta- 
tion of  national  duty  and  destiny  that  is  almost 
unique  in  antiquity,  and  that  possesses  consider- 
able interest  for  modern  times. 

1  These  passages  include  at  least  the  following  verses: 
Isaiah  42:1-7;  49:1-6;  50:4-9;  52:13-53:12. 


ON  INTERNATIONAL  SERVICE  197 

The  term  "service"  is  so  familiar  to  us  now- 
adays, in  a  political  sense,  as  an  ideal  if  not  a 
genuine  motive,  that  we  are  wont  to  forget  its 
simpler  and  suggestive  meaning.  When  slavery 
was  an  existent  human  custom  and  servant  or 
slave,  if  applied  to  religion  or  politics,  was  still 
a  conscious  metaphor,  public  or  religious  ser- 
vice meant  a  real  kind  of  serving.  Among  the 
Hebrews  and  the  other  Semites,  where  men  so 
freely  used  human  relations  to  describe  relations 
with  the  gods,  the  idea  of  the  service  of  God  was 
soon  developed.  This  conception  was  embodied 
in  the  names  of  both  gods  and  men.  The  former 
were  called  king  and  master,  the  latter  servant  or 
slave.  Thus  the  term  "servant  of  Jehovah"  was 
no  novelty  in  the  sixth  century.  The  originality 
of  the  passages  under  consideration  consists  in 
the  scope  and  nature  of  the  service,  and  perhaps 
in  the  definition  of  the  servant. 

For,  in  the  first  place,  the  service  contemplated 
is  distinctly  international.  From  the  viewpoint 
of  most  earlier  Hebrew  thought  this  would  be  an 
innovation.  Except  for  some  slight  hints  of  the 
prophets,  Israel  rarely  escaped  from  the  old 
nationalistic  view  of  religion.  They  were  the 
people  of  Jehovah  and  Jehovah  was  the  God  of 
Israel.  Hence  the  service  of  God  naturally  found 
its  scope  within  the  nation.  National  heroes, 
kings,  prophets,  warriors,  would  be  Jehovah's 
servants — or  the  whole  nation  collectively.  But 


198  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

their  service  would  be  for  God  and  country,  two 
objects  of  identical  interest.  Other  nations  were 
expected  to  serve  other  gods,  and  other  gods  to 
choose  other  nations.  But  Jehovah  had  chosen 
Israel  for  himself. 

Here,  however,  the  servant  of  Jehovah  is  given 
a  wider  field.  In  the  Hebrew  idiom  this  broad 
horizon  is  expressed  by  two  means — either  by 
such  plural  terms  as  "nations"  (usually  trans- 
lated "Gentiles"),  "kings,"  and  "peoples,"  or* by 
the  mention  of  the  most  distant  places,  "the 
isles"  (perhaps  the  European  coast  lands)  or 
"the  ends  of  the  earth."  These  are  to  be  the 
witnesses  of  the  servant's  attention  and  the  ob- 
jects of  his  service;  to  them  he  is  to  bring  light, 
justice,  salvation.  For  the  God  of  this  poet 
national  service  does  not  suffice;  patriotism  is  too 
petty.  In  words  that  remind  us  of  the  famous 
saying  of  Edith  Cavell,  Jehovah  is  represented  as 
admonishing  his  servant: 

"It  is  too  light  a  thing  to  be  my  servant  to  raise  up 

the  tribes  of  Jacob, 
And  to  restore  the  preserved  of  Israel; 
I  will  also  give  thee  for  a  light  to  the  Gentiles, 
That  thou  mayest  be  my  salvation  unto  the  end  of 

the  earth"  (49:6). 

"Patriotism  is  not  enough."  Even  when  the 
motive  is  not  national  aggrandizement,  but  merely 
the  restoration  of  a  nation  in  sore  distress  and 


ON  INTERNATIONAL  SERVICE  199 

disaster,  the  servant  of  God  must  not  be  content 
with  national  service  for  the  nation's  sake. 
"Jewry  for  the  Jews"  is  not  his  type  of  slogan. 
Even  nationalism  must  be  altruistic. 

By  this  extension  of  the  scope  of  service  the 
Hebrew  prophet  enhances  the  meaning  of  both 
service  and  election.  The  unique  relation  be- 
tween God  and  his  elect  is  for  the  selfish  advan- 
tage of  neither.  Through  them  the  whole  world 
is  benefited.  The  exilic  prophet  has  quite 
changed  the  old  ideal  of  national  election.  The 
servant  is  the  chosen  of  God,  but  the  selection 
involves  duties  quite  as  much  as  privileges  on  the 
servant's  part.  He  is  chosen  for  service — not  of 
himself  or  of  his  nation,  but  of  all  mankind.  The 
great  ideal  of  foreign  missions  first  finds  expres- 
sion here.1  It  is  the  transmutation  of  all  the 
other  ideals  of  selfish  satisfaction.  God's  purpose 
in  history  is  not  an  exclusive  scheme  for  reciprocal 
service  between  himself  and  his  chosen  nation. 
They  are  rather  co-workers  in  a  great  missionary 
enterprise — the  evangelization  of  the  world.  In- 
deed the  service  is  something  more  than  the 
preaching  of  the  true  religion.  It  is  a  life  and 
example  influencing  others  in  the  most  effective 
way.  Religion,  or  judgment,  as  the  Hebrew  word 
is  translated,  comprehends  not  merely  religion 

1  When  a  later  writer  characterizes  the  great  apostle  to  the 
Gentiles  as  a  light  to  the  Gentiles,  a  chosen  vessel  to  bear 
God's  name  before  nations  and  kings,  he  is  simply  borrowing 
the  expressions  of  these  songs. 


200  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

but  a  whole  culture  in  its  fullest  sense,  and  in- 
volves the  highest  standards  of  personal  and  so- 
cial life.  This  is  the  light  and  salvation  which 
God,  through  his  servant,  sends  forth  to  all  the 
world. 

But  the  method  of  the  servant  is  quite  as  note- 
worthy as  the  field  of  his  service.  Transcending 
national  boundaries  was  not  altogether  a  new 
thing  in  antiquity,  but  there  was  only  one 'ap- 
proved method  of  doing  it — military  conquest. 
The  great  empires  of  the  East — Assyria,  Babylo- 
nia, and  now  Persia — were  marked  illustrations  of 
international  influence,  but  their  method  was 
the  sword.  The  new  international  servant  has 
another  method. 

"He  will  not  cry,  nor  lift  up  his  voice, 
Nor  cause  it  to  be  heard  in  the  street. 
A  bruised  reed  will  he  not  break, 
And  a  dimly  burning  wick  will  he  not  quench: 
He  will  bring  forth  justice  in  truth. 
He  will  not  fail  nor  be  discouraged, 
Till  he  have  set  justice  in  the  earth; 
And  the  isles  shall  wait  for  his  law"  (42:2-4). 

Apparently  the  service  contemplated  is  to  fol- 
low a  quiet,  unobtrusive,  and  pacific  method,  ex- 
ercised in  patience  and  in  spite  of  discouragement. 
It  is  the  way  of  all  effective  and  permanent  con- 
versions. It  is  persistent  and  victorious,  though 
distinctly  non-resistant.  Confident  in  Jehovah 
the  servant  submits  to  abuse.  "I  have  set  my 


ON  INTERNATIONAL  SERVICE  201 

face,"  he  says,  "like  a  flint,  and  I  know  that  I 
shall  not  be  put  to  shame."  Such  a  method  in- 
volves misunderstanding  and  suffering.  In  the 
later  chapters  suffering  itself  is  vindicated  as 
the  servant's  method,  though  few  can  be  expected 
to  believe  in  such  an  unexpected  and  unheard-of 
programme.  Only  at  the  end  do  the  witnesses 
and  beneficiaries  of  his  service  appreciate  the 
meaning  of  his  suffering.  This  is  the  burden  of 
the  famous  last  poem  of  the  series,  the  mystery 
of  the  suffering  servant. 

"Surely  he  hath  borne  our  griefs, 
And  carried  our  sorrows; 
Yet  we  did  esteem  him  stricken. 
Smitten  of  God,  and  afflicted. 
But  he  was  wounded  for  our  transgressions, 
He  was  bruised  for  our  iniquities; 
The  chastisement  of  our  peace  was  upon  him; 
And  with  his  stripes  we  are  healed"  (53:4,  5). 

In  this  classic  passage  vicarious  suffering  is 
plainly  described,  and  its  ultimate  triumph  in 
spite  of  apparent  failure.  As  Jesus  did  after  him, 
the  poet  has  substituted,  for  conventional  stand- 
ards of  greatness,  the  unexpected  success  of 
altruistic  service.  And  he  has  found  for  innocent 
suffering  not  merely  a  theodical  explanation  but 
a  positive  value.  He  has  anticipated  the  riddle 
of  the  cross. 

The  novelty  of  these  elements  in  the  poet's 


202  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

conception  only  makes  more  keen  our  interest  in 
the  further  question — the  identification  of  the 
servant.  Who  is  this  mysterious  figure  with  the 
strange  mission?  Unfortunately  the  poetic  lan- 
guage, and,  perhaps,  an  intentional  indirectness 
of  reference,  do  not  make  the  answer  to  this  ques- 
tion easy.  Scholars  do  not  agree  here,  though  on 
other  phases  of  the  poet's  meaning  they  readily 
reach  a  common  conclusion.  The  language,  is 
certainly  personal,  and  it  is  natural  that  it  should 
be  understood  literally  of  an  individual.  In  that 
case  there  still  remains  the  question  that  was 
asked  of  Philip:  "Of  whom  speaketh  the  prophet 
this — of  himself,  or  of  some  other?"  Many  ele- 
ments in  the  picture  suit  Jeremiah;  many  of  them 
are  typical  of  every  prophet.  Of  course,  from 
the  earliest  clays  of  the  Church,  Christians  have 
found  in  the  servant  a  type  and  prophecy  of  the 
sufferings  of  Christ.1  No  individual  more  strik- 
ingly fulfilled  the  prophecy  than  Christ  himself. 
And  yet  this  fulfilment  does  not  prove  that  the 
original  meaning  of  the  writer  was  individual. 
There  is  much  to  be  said  for  the  view  that  the 
author  used  the  common  device  of  personification, 
and  means  by  the  servant  not  a  person  but  a 
group — either  the  better  elements  in  the  nation 
or,  ideally,  the  nation  as  a  whole.  Repeatedly, 
through  the  surrounding  passages  and  apparently 

1  It  is  not,  however,  clear  that  Jesus  himself  or  the  Jews 
understood  even  Isaiah  53  messianically. 


ON  INTERNATIONAL  SERVICE  203 

once  or  twice  in  the  servant  poems,  Israel  or 
Jacob  is  identified  with  the  servant. 

Whatever  solution  is  given  to  this  problem — 
and  into  the  full  discussion  of  it  we  cannot  enter 
here — the  political  ideals  of  this  prophet  are  great 
and  revolutionary.  And  if  following  the  opinion 
of  many  careful  students  we  accept  further  the 
identification  of  the  servant  with  the  nation,  the 
national  significance  of  the  passages  is  even 
greater.  Like  many  before  him,  the  writer  is 
thinking  wholly  in  national  terms;  Israel  is  still 
the  unit.  He  is  groping  for  the  meaning  of  his 
nation's  career.  He  would  explain  to  his  fellow 
countrymen  the  sufferings  of  the  past  and  present 
in  terms  that  would  remove  not  merely  impa- 
tience and  despair,  but  selfishness  and  the  ex- 
clusive nationalistic  spirit.  And  he  finds  the  jus- 
tification of  God  and  the  glory  of  Israel  in  its 
vicarious  suffering  for  the  sins  of  the  world.  In 
modern  terms  he  thinks  of  his  country  as  a  mar- 
tyr nation,  a  Christ  among  nations,  redeeming 
the  world  not  by  the  sword  of  triumph  nor  the 
self-assertive  spirit  of  human  pride,  but  through 
the  way  of  the  cross. 

This  sublime  conception  finds  its  fullest  per- 
sonal fulfilment  in  the  life,  teaching,  and  death  of 
Jesus  of  Nazareth.  But  as  the  ideal  for  a  nation 
it  is  still  unfulfilled.  To  a  considerable  degree 
the  Jewish  people  themselves  have  illustrated  its 
possibilities;  they  have  been  a  light  to  the  Gen- 


204  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

tiles,  carrying  much  truth  about  God  and  his  will 
to  the  ends  of  the  earth.  We  would  not  under- 
estimate the  services  of  Judaism  to  mankind. 
Many  a  nation,  too,  has  suffered  as  the  servant  is 
pictured  as  suffering,  but  certainly  no  nation  with 
an  innocence  comparable  to  that  of  Christ.  What 
the  prophet  hoped  for  was  a  nation  without  guilt 
or  guile,  a  nation  free  from  "violence"  and  "de- 
ceit," a  nation  consecrated  to  the  service  of  man- 
kind, which  was  willing  to  rely  on  the  patient 
methods  of  God's  training,  so  unfamiliar  and  so 
scorned  in  the  imperialistic  Realpolitik  of  that  day. 
That  hope  still  remains  an  alluring  ideal. 
Though,  as  a  personal  ideal,  it  has  been  highly 
praised  and  sometimes  even  practised,  it  has 
scarcely  been  understood  and  certainly  never 
fully  adopted  as  a  national  programme.  In  these 
days  of  reconsidered  national  ambitions  its  out- 
lines seem  Utopian  and  unreal.  The  altruism  of 
international  service  can  scarcely  emerge  when 
fear  and  hate  and  self-seeking  so  fully  control 
men's  minds.  Not  only  the  great  and  prosperous 
nations  but  even  the  weak  and  crushed  peoples 
like  the  Israel  of  the  exile  are  far  more  bent  on 
national  than. international  aims.  Neither  is  the 
prophet's  method  of  service  popular.  Men  still 
look  with  scorn  on  national  patience  and  humility 
compared  with  blatant  patriotism  and  bravado. 
They  call  military  service  "the  service"  and  trust 
to  physical  force  to  establish  the  ideals  for  which 


ON  INTERNATIONAL  SERVICE  205 

they  stand.  Even  where  the  aims  of  modern 
nations  agree  with  the  ideals  of  the  prophet — 
for  his  "light,"  "salvation,"  and  "judgment"  are 
only  ancient  names  for  culture,  safety,  and  jus- 
tice— their  champions  apply,  as  means  to  those 
ends,  the  futile  methods  of  the  servants  of  Bel 
and  Marduk  rather  than  the  availing  methods  of 
the  servant  of  Jehovah.  Yet  the  world  still 
needs  the  strange  and  unpopular  ideal  of  the 
exilic  prophet.  It  needs,  in  the  first  place,  that 
splendid  discontent  with  nationalism  for  its  own 
sake  and  the  substitution  of  the  common  good  of 
all.  In  the  second  place,  it  needs  that  still  more 
novel  reversal  of  values,  that  strange  method  of 
the  true  servant  of  Jehovah,  the  reliance  on  spir- 
itual forces  of  love,  patience,  and  self-sacrifice. 
In  this  sign  it  will  conquer,  through  seeming  fail- 
ure and  defeat.  Both  the  mission  and  the 
method  are  needed  for  complete  fulfilment  of  the 
prophet's  hopes.  International  service  cannot 
avail  unless  it  is  prompted  by  the  spirit  of  sacri- 
fice, and  sacrifice  cannot  avail  unless  it  means 
altruistic  service.  For  the  nation,  as  for  the  indi- 
vidual, this  is  the  supreme  ambition — not  to  be 
ministered  unto  but  to  minister,  and,  if  necessary, 
to  give  its  life  a  ransom  for  many.  The  nation 
that  will  do  less  than  that  is  not  only  unchristian, 
it  has  not  even  realized  the  best  ideals  of  Judaism. 


XXI 

THE   INTENSIFICATION   OF  NATIONALISM 

THE  centuries  from  Zedekiah  to  Judas  Macca- 
bseus  are  strangely  wanting  in  full  political  record. 
The  continuous  history  of  Kings  closes  with  the  ex- 
ile. The  author  of  Chronicles  who  attempted  to 
continue  his  revision  of  that  earlier  record  could 
discover  only  a  few  miscellaneous  Jewish  sources, 
which  he  pieced  together  in  a  confusing  manner 
in  our  books  of  Ezra  and  Nehemiah.  Josephus 
can  supplement  the  Chronicler's  information  only 
by  selections  from  Gentile  history,  and  by  a  few 
popular  Jewish  legends.  Thus,  for  our  knowledge 
of  political  thought  in  this  era  we  are  left  largely 
to  the  indirect  evidence  of  the  late  prophets, 
psalmists,  historians,  and  jurists. 

But  in  spite  of  the  slightness  of  our  information 
it  is  evident  that  these  four  centuries  were  times 
when  a  single  direct  course  of  national  evolution 
was  confused  by  varied  and  conflicting  tenden- 
cies. Out  of  darkness  and  confusion  many  par- 
tial suggestions  of  new  developments  of  thought 
vaguely  appear.  Our  estimate  of  the  ideals  in 
this  era  must  be  based  largely  upon  their  fruits  in 
later  Judaism,  as  that  stage  of  development  is 
more  clearly  disclosed  to  us  in  the  Apocrypha, 

206 


INTENSIFICATION  OF  NATIONALISM     207 

the  New  Testament,  and  the  rabbinic  literature. 
No  one  or  two  consecutive  lines  of  development 
exhaust  the  national  movements  that  produced 
these  results,  yet  it  may  be  convenient  to  speak 
collectively  of  two  kinds  of  opposing  forces — the 
centrifugal  and  the  centripetal  tendencies  of 
Judaism. 

To  the  former  category  belong  all  the  sponta- 
neous and  natural  results  of  the  absorption  of  a 
petty  nation  in  a  world  empire.  With  the  con- 
quest of  Jerusalem  in  586  B.  c.  national  sovereignty 
and  national  government  disappeared.  Even  the 
visible  signs  and  foci  of  national  adherence — po- 
litical and  religious — vanished  with  the  razing  of 
the  city  and  the  temple.  And,  above  all,  the 
scattering  of  Jews  throughout  the  world — the 
exile,  or  dispersion,  as  it  is  called  henceforth — 
made  national  rehabilitation  difficult.  At  home 
and  in  foreign  lands  the  cultures  and  the  religions 
of  the  victors  naturally  overshadowed  the  van- 
quished Jewish  civilization  and  its  God.  The 
new  imperialism  was  usually  a  great  leveller. 
Conformity  was  easier  than  local  and  racial  pecu- 
liarity, and  cosmopolitanism  was  safer  than 
ardent  nationalism.  Even  war,  the  great  con- 
comitant of  nationalism,  was  no  longer  possible 
for  the  Jews  as  an  independent  enterprise.  They 
were  merely  subjects  or  allies  of  successive  em- 
pires, helpless  pawns  in  the  games  of  kings,  pitiful 
victims  in  the  cockpit  of  Asia.  Thus  their  na- 


208  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

tionality  was  deprived  of  the  natural  forces  of 
cohesion  and  exposed  to  all  the  subtle  denation- 
alizing tendencies  of  a  people  discouraged,  dis- 
persed, and  overshadowed  by  civilizations  more 
catholic  and  in  some  ways  more  cultured  than 
their  own  provincialism. 

The  decentralizing  influences  upon  Judaism 
were  chiefly  unconscious  and  unintended.  There 
is  little  evidence  that  their  Babylonian  and  Per- 
sian masters  cared  for  anything  but  their  political 
subservience.  Indeed,  Cyrus  adopted  the  en- 
lightened policy  of  conserving  and  stimulating 
local  cultural  and  religious  influences,  and  of  re- 
storing populations  and  reconstructing  business. 
Nor  is  there  evidence  that  many  Jews  for  their 
part  became  deliberate  renegades  to  their  faith 
and  race,  preferring  the  wider  outlook  to  their 
older  inheritance,  or  cultivating  artificially  a  new 
internationalism.  But  the  change  was  none  the 
less  effective  and  powerful  for  the  reason  that  it 
was  spontaneous  and  natural.  And  had  it  not 
been  for  peculiar  conditions  and  conscious  resis- 
tance, Judaism  would  have  joined  the  coalescence 
of  petty  races  that  befell  all  her  neighbors. 

Of  course  there  were  some  centripetal  forces 
that  were  also  subconscious.  There  was  the  old 
patriotism  that  endured  by  a  natural  momentum 
long  after  its  object  was  to  all  outward  sight  de- 
stroyed. There  was  an  instinctive  conservatism 
that  made  the  Jews  resent  and  avoid  new  or  alien 


INTENSIFICATION  OP  NATIONALISM     209 

habits  of  speech,  behavior,  and  apparel.  But  the 
maintenance  of  Hebrew  nationalism  amid  the  hos- 
tile and  obscuring  influences  of  the  day  became  a 
definite,  conscious  policy  of  the  whole  nation  or 
of  its  leaders,  and  has  come  down  to  us  to-day 
with  very  little  modification. 

Indeed,  the  exile  proved  to  be  to  a  certain  extent 
a  new  beginning  of  national  self-consciousness. 
The  death  of  the  body  seemed  to  liberate  the 
soul.  To  be  sure,  one  often  hears  it  said  that  in 
Judaism  nationalism  was  giving  place  to  individ- 
ualism. As  a  matter  of  fact,  the  exile  marks 
neither  the  end  of  one  nor  the  beginning  of  the 
other,  but  the  coincident  development  of  both. 
Professor  Knudson  has  recently  questioned  the 
usual  hypothesis  of  early  national  self-conscious- 
ness in  Israel: 

The  general  notion  of  solidarity  as  applied  to  the 
nation  is  clear  enough.  Various  aspects  of  it  appear 
in  the  Old  Testament.  .  .  .  The  ancient  Israelites 
looked  upon  the  nation  as  a  self-identical  moral  per- 
sonality, embracing  in  its  unity  not  only  all  existing 
members  but  also  past  generations. 

The  question,  however,  arises  as  to  whether  the 
idea  of  national  solidarity  actually  existed  in  such  a 
definite  form  as  this  in  the  minds  of  the  Hebrews, 
whether  it  was  not  with  them  rather  a  vague  feeling 
than  a  clear  concept.  It  might  even  be  questioned 
whether  we  have  not  here  simply  a  personification 
rather  than  a  personalization  of  the  nation.  ...  It  is, 
consequently,  a  mistake  to  attribute  to  the  early  Israel- 


210  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

ites  a  paramount  interest  in  national  affairs  and  a 
superior  devotion  to  the  common  good.  Their  nation- 
alism was  largely  of  the  instinctive  or  mechanical  type. 
Not  until  we  come  to  literary  prophecy  do  we  have  a 
really  serious  effort  to  bring  Israelitic  nationalism  to 
self-consciousness.  Here  the  blind  patriotism  of  the 
past  and  a  merely  mechanical  conformity  to  rites  and 
customs  are  set  aside  as  worthless  and  misleading. 
The  nation  has  a  mission  to  perform,  but  it  is  a  moral 
mission;  and  this  mission  can  be  performed  only  by 
resolute  devotion  to  the  will  of  God  and  the  conlmon 
good  as  expressed  especially  in  the  moral  law.  To 
bring  this  truth  home  to  the  minds  and  consciences  of 
the  people  was  the  chief  task  of  the  eighth-century 
prophets.  And  the  work  they  began  was  in  its  essen- 
tial nature  carried  on  by  the  Deuteronomists,  and  the 
exilic  and  post-exilic  prophets  and  lawgivers.  What 
we  have,  therefore,  in  the  history  of  Israel  is  not  a  grad- 
ual decline  of  nationalism,  but  an  increasing  conscious- 
ness of  it.1 

It  was  fortunate  that  the  policy  adopted  to 
maintain  national  identity  did  not  follow  the 
usual  course  of  political  and  military  effort.  Of 
course  the  Hebrews  long  cherished  a  hope  for 
political  restoration.  But,  after  all,  independence 
is  not  essential  to  national  greatness,  and  revolu- 
tion against  their  lords  would  either  have  been  in 
vain  or  of  temporary  and  superficial  success. 
Neither  was  geographical  reunion  altogether  im- 
portant. Certainly  the  restoration  of  Palestine's 
former  population  two  generations  or  two  mil- 
1  Religious  Teaching  of  the  Old  Testament,  pp.  325  ff. 


INTENSIFICATION  OF  NATIONALISM     211 

lennia  after  the  deportations  of  Nebuchadnezzar 
has  been  over-emphasized  by  many  persons  from 
the  Chronicler  to  the  present-day  Zionists.  The 
essential  thing  in  nationality  for  inner  unity  and 
for  service  to  mankind,  is  not  its  separate  govern- 
ment and  habitat,  but  its  distinctive  genius  and 
culture.  The  heroes  of  Judaism  were  not  its  mili- 
tary patriots  and  political  liberators,  but  the 
creators  and  champions  of  a  Jewish  civilization. 
And  in  the  transfer  of  the  nation's  allegiance  from 
land  and  government  to  God  and  law  is  one  of 
the  great  lessons  as  well  as  one  of  the  miracles  of 
history.  For  of  all  the  remaining  elements  of  the 
old  nationalism,  religion — the  national  religion — 
was  the  most  powerful  nucleus.  About  it  all 
other  Hebrew  loyalties  could  rally  and  develop  in 
spite  of  heathen  rule  and  foreign  land.  It  f ocussed 
the  ideals  and  culture  of  the  race  and  conserved 
the  national  hopes.  Of  course  adjustments  were 
necessary.  The  destruction  of  the  temple,  the 
one  legal  centre  of  worship,  according  to  Deuteron- 
omy, may  have  really  strengthened  Judaism  more 
than  did  restoration  of  the  temple  some  seventy 
years  later.  It  delocalized  religion  and,  together 
with  the  wide  dispersion  of  Jews  throughout  the 
world,  it  transformed  religion  into  a  movable  in- 
stitution. The  law,  also,  as  the  written  charter 
of  national  custom,  gave  a  new  basis  for  religious 
allegiance.  Obedience  to  the  law  was  the  new 
patriotism,  and  this  could  be  practised  wherever 


212  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

the  Jew  was  placed.  Knowledge  of  the  law  was 
the  new  requirement  of  citizenship,  and  the  syna- 
gogue became  the  universal  school  of  nationalism. 
No  nation  with  a  government  and  land  of  its  own 
ever  possessed  a  more  effective  instrument  of 
nationalization  than  the  educational  system  of 
Judaism.  And  by  its  curriculum  not  only  the 
youth  but  adults  were  constantly  held  true  to 
the  literature,  the  language,  the  culture,  as  .well 
as  the  faith  of  their  fathers. 

It  is  difficult  for  modern  Christians  to  look 
upon  this  intensive  nationalism  of  the  Jews  with- 
out some  traditional  prejudices.  It  is  always 
natural  to  regard  foreign  customs  as  burdensome; 
and  the  burden  of  the  law  seems  to  us  to  have 
become  grotesque  casuistry  in  the  elaborations  of 
the  Pharisees.  But  legalism  was  only  the  des- 
perate attempt  to  maintain  national  identity. 
To  its  advocates  the  only  alternative  seemed 
national  annihilation.  And  whatever  we  may 
think  of  it  as  religion,  we  must  at  least  recognize 
in  Jewish  legalism  the  patriotic  and  successful 
effort,  heroically  undertaken  in  the  face  of  un- 
paralleled obstacles,  not  simply  to  secure  for 
Judaism  some  selfish  advancement  or  place  in  the 
sun,  but  to  fulfil  the  duty  and  the  high  destiny 
which  Providence  had  given  it. 

Perhaps  the  chief  fault  of  intensive  Judaism 
was  its  ingrowing  exclusiveness.  It  is  a  misfor- 
tune that  loyalties  seem  to  flourish  best  by  odious 


INTENSIFICATION  OF  NATIONALISM     213 

comparisons,  and  that  uniform  standards  of  na- 
tional culture  are  most  readily  observed  in  con- 
tradistinction from  others.  Within  the  nation,  to 
be  sure,  this  difficulty  is  not  serious,  but  in  con- 
tact with  their  neighbors  the  Hebrews  were  con- 
stantly given  to  the  spirit  of  self-differentiation. 
This  difference  had,  indeed,  been  recognized  for 
many  generations;  the  prophets  had  always  been 
aware  of  the  cultural,  especially  the  religious,  un- 
likeness  of  their  neighbors,  and  had  warned  against 
religious  syncretism.  Even  in  Deuteronomy  the 
nations  are  made  to  recognize  the  self-sufficiency 
of  Israel's  culture — in  its  religion  and  its  law. 
"Surely,"  they  say,  "this  great  nation  is  a  wise 
and  understanding  people."  "For  what  great 
nation  is  there,"  continues  the  author,  "that  hath 
a  god  so  nigh  unto  them  as  Jehovah  our  God  is 
whensoever  we  call  upon  him?  And  what  great 
nation  is  there,  that  hath  statutes  and  ordinances 
so  righteous  as  all  this  law  ?" 1  "  Deuteronomy," 
says  a  recent  commentator,  "  expresses  the  soul  of 
Israel,  conscious  of  their  distinction,  roused  to 
every  foreign  influence  as  the  threat  of  their  dis- 
integration, and  concentrating  upon  their  spiritual 
heritage  and  duties,  since  only  by  loyalty  to  these 
can  they  preserve  their  individuality  as  a  people 
and  prove  their  right  to  live."2  In  the  next  code,3 
holiness,  the  characteristic  word,  we  cannot  for- 

1  Deut.  4:5-8.  2  G.  A.  Smith,  Deuteronomy,  p.  xciv. 

'  The  so-called  "Holiness  Code"  of  Leviticus  17-26. 


214  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

get,  has  its  force  of  separateness  as  well  as  of 
purity.  And  throughout  later  legalism  all  efforts 
at  national  unity  and  uniformity  seemed  to  lead 
to  aloofness  and  peculiarity.  It  is  no  accident 
that  of  two  terms  for  later  zealots  for  the  law,  one 
(Chaber)  seems  to  mean  comrade,  the  other 
(Pharisee)  separatist.  Association  means  dis- 
sociation whenever  it  occurs  unless  the  unit  is 
all-inclusive. 

And  so  it  came  to  pass  that  Judaism  drew  fur- 
ther away  from  the  other  nations.  The  very 
word  "nations"  gained  a  sense  of  distance  and 
disdain  that  is  well  felt  in  our  English  transla- 
tions, "Gentile,"  or  "heathen."  National  ego- 
ism expressed  itself  as  clearly  in  this  dichotomy 
as  in  the  distinction  of  Greeks  against  the  bar- 
barians. In  the  book  of  Nehemiah  the  Samaritan 
schism  and  the  rigorous  abolition  of  foreign  wives 
show  the  inevitable  results  of  such  ruthless  in- 
tensification of  national  purity.  Like  the  wall  of 
China,  a  strong  cultural  defense  was  built  up  by 
zealous  rabbis  and  scribes  about  the  chosen  peo- 
ple. Circumcision  and  sabbath-keeping  became 
their  distinctive  marks  throughout  the  world. 
The  sense  of  difference  became  mutual.  The 
Gentiles  ridiculed  the  peculiarities  of  the  Jews 
and  gave  them  a  separate  ghetto  in  their  cities 
and  a  separate  name  in  their  classification  of 
mankind.  The  peculiarity,  which  to  the  Jew 
meant  special  devotion  to  Jehovah,  seemed  to 


INTENSIFICATION  OF  NATIONALISM     215 

his  neighbor  eccentricity  and  stubborn  supersti- 
tion. So  the  way  was  prepared  for  persecution 
and  pogrom  and  the  dreary  history  of  anti-Semitic 
bitterness. 

Of  course  the  ingrowing  tendencies  of  Judaism 
did  not  wholly  prevail.  From  the  earliest  times 
the  resident  alien  had  been  treated  with  true 
nomadic  hospitality,  and  even  in  the  later  Jewish 
particularism  he  enjoyed  far  greater  consideration 
than  did  the  stranger  without  the  gates.  The 
intolerant  and  unsocial  attitude  did  not  always 
pass  unchallenged;  it  was  rebuked  by  the  indirect 
method  of  fiction — as  in  Jonah  and  Ruth.  The 
former  we  shall  consider  in  the  next  chapter;  the 
latter  is  a  beautiful  idyl  that  is  most  readily  un- 
derstood as  a  gentle  reproach  against  the  whole- 
sale forbidding  of  mixed  marriages.  The  heroine, 
though  a  Moabitess,  became  a  devout  worshipper 
of  Jehovah  and  an  ancestor  of  the  great  David. 
Another  writer  distinctly  warns  against  the  dis- 
couragement of  law-observing  proselytes,  who 
speak,  saying,  "  Jehovah  will  surely  separate  me 
from  his  people."  On  the  contrary  God  says: 

The  foreigners  that  join  themselves  to  Jehovah,  to 
minister  unto  him,  and  to  love  the  name  of  Jehovah, 
to  be  his  servants,  every  one  that  keepeth  the  sabbath 
from  profaning  it,  and  holdeth  fast  my  covenant;  even 
them  will  I  bring  to  my  holy  mountain,  and  make 
them  joyful  in  my  house  of  prayer  :  their  burnt  offer- 
ings and  their  sacrifices  shall  be  accepted  upon  mine 


216  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

altar;  for  my  house  shall  be  called  a  house  of  prayer 
for  all  peoples.1 

Even  Hellenism,  though  it  became  the  arch- 
enemy of  Judaism,  was  also  the  object  of  much 
Jewish  friendship  and  conciliation.  In  Philo  and 
more  particularly  in  Christianity  the  best  ele- 
ments, both  Hebraic  and  Hellenic,  of  literature, 
philosophy,  and  religion  were  fused  amicably  and 
preserved. 

1  Isaiah  56:3,  6,  7. 


XXII 

A  CARTOON  OF  NATIONALISM 

VERY  few  Christian  laymen  can  give  an  intelli- 
gent reply  to  the  question,  What  is  the  message 
of  the  Book  of  Jonah  ?  The  incident  of  the 
"whale"  has  completely  overshadowed  the  main 
point  of  the  writer,  and  having  been  made  the 
crux  of  orthodoxy,  receives,  as  is  unfortunately 
the  case  with  many  speculative  questions  raised 
by  the  Bible,  more  emphasis  than  does  the  really 
significant  moral  teaching.  There  is  a  strange 
agreement  between  believers  and  sceptics  in  re- 
jecting it  as  a  miracle;  the  former  do  so  by  elab- 
orate arguments  to  prove  that  it  could  have  hap- 
pened naturally,  the  latter  by  frank  disbelief. 
But  even  those  who  accept  the  story  of  the  Book 
of  Jonah  as  literally  true  often  take  it  scarcely 
seriously,  but  with  a  smile  at  the  submarine  ex- 
periences of  the  ill-starred  prophet.  And  herein 
is  the  real  misfortune,  not  that  they  smile  at  the 
story,  but  that  they  smile  at  the  wrong  place. 
For  there  is  real  humor  in  the  book,  but  the 
humor,  as  we  shall  see,  is  the  grim  humor  of 
absurd  human  narrow-mindedness. 

The  Book  of  Jonah  receives  its  place  in  the  Old 

217 


218  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

Testament  canon  because  of  the  person  of  its 
hero.  "Jonah,  the  son  of  Amittai,  the  prophet, 
who  was  of  Gath-hepher,"  is  mentioned  casually 
by  the  Book  of  Kings  in  connection  with  the  ex- 
tension of  the  kingdom  of  Israel  under  Jeroboam 
the  Second.  He  was,  therefore,  a  contemporary 
of  Amos  and  perhaps  of  the  other  prophets  of  the 
eighth  century  B.  c.  His  home  was  in  the  hills  of 
lower  Galilee  near  the  Nazareth  of  later  times. 
No  further  record  of  his  preaching  is  given,  and 
the  book  that  bears  his  name  not  only  was  not 
written  by  him  but  does  not  even  give,  as  do 
most  of  the  books  of  the  prophets,  the  outline  of 
his  message.  It  is,  rather,  a  narrative  about 
Jonah  and  appears  to  have  been  written  several 
centuries  later.  As  in  the  Book  of  Daniel,  and  as 
frequently  in  the  later  Jewish  and  even  modern 
writings,  the  author  has  selected  not  a  purely  fic- 
titious character  but  some  real  person  of  the  past 
as  the  basis  of  his  story,  and  has  filled  in  the  set- 
ting from  his  historical  imagination.  In  Jonah 
the  setting  is  far  from  detailed.  Nothing  is  said 
of  Israel's  history  or  conditions,  and  concerning 
Nineveh  only  its  size  and  its  wickedness  are  men- 
tioned. The  story  is  told  with  the  utmost  sim- 
plicity and — to  our  Occidental  eyes — with  a  kind 
of  grotesqueness.  The  successive  stages  of  the 
story  are  mechanically  brought  on  as  by  a  deus  ex 
machina  without  much  regard  for  natural  proc- 
esses. The  incident  of  the  gourd  is  really  as 


CARTOON  OF  NATIONALISM        ,      219 

strange  as  that  of  the  fish.  It  is  to  be  noted  that 
just  as  Jehovah  sent  out  the  storm  and  "prepared 
a  great  fish  to  swallow  up  Jonah,"  and  spake  to 
the  fish  to  vomit  out  Jonah,  so  he  "prepared"  in 
turn  a  "gourd/'  "a  worm,"  and  a  "sultry  east 
wind"  to  teach  a  final  lesson. 

To  our  modern  mind  the  realism  of  the  psychol- 
ogy of  the  story  contrasts  most  favorably  with 
this  Oriental  artificiality  of  plot.  The  sailors  in 
the  storm  are  described  with  real  dramatic  skill. 
Their  religious  fear  amid  danger  and  their  regard 
for  Jonah  and  his  God,  if  not  entirely  according 
to  our  ways  of  thought,  are  nevertheless  fully  in- 
telligible. So  is  the  loving-kindness  of  Jehovah 
for  the  great,  ignorant  masses  of  Nineveh  and  his 
compassion  even  for  cattle.  And  it  is  in  the  char- 
acter of  Jonah,  drawn  in  a  few  sketchy  lines,  that 
the  real  teaching  of  the  book  is  to  be  found. 

The  narrative  is  simple:  Jonah,  the  prophet,  is 
commanded  to  preach  against  Nineveh.  At  first 
he  tries  to  escape  this  duty  by  taking  ship  for 
Spain  (Tarshish),  at  the  opposite  end  of  the  earth, 
but  is  brought  back.  The  second  time  he  per- 
functorily obeys  the  command  and  immediately 
the  city  repents.  But  why  did  Jonah  disobey? 
Stubbornness,  laziness,  timidity,  fear  of  being  dis- 
credited, can  hardly  be  the  reasons.  It  is  appar- 
ently because  he  really  wished  Nineveh  to  be 
destroyed  and  was  afraid  that  if  he  preached  the 
city  would  repent  and  be  spared  by  God.  This  is 


220  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

shown  in  the  peevish  "I-told-you-so"  when  after- 
ward he  says  to  Jehovah: 

Was  not  this  my  saying,  when  I  was  yet  in  my 
country?  Therefore  I  hasted  to  flee  unto  Tarshish; 
for  I  knew  that  thou  art  a  gracious  God,  and  merciful, 
slow  to  anger,  and  abundant  in  loving-kindness,  and 
repentest  thee  of  the  evil.  Therefore  now,  O  Jehovah, 
take,  I  beseech  thee,  my  life  from  me;  for  it  is  better 
for  me  to  die  than  to  live  (4:2,  3). 

Jonah  is  represented  as  a  man  of  selfish,  narrow 
interests.  When  he  is  given  a  message  of  doom 
to  a  foreign  city  he  refuses  to  preach  it,  lest  the 
city  should  repent  and  be  saved.  Finally,  com- 
pelled against  his  will  to  be  the  instrument  of 
such  a  truly  merciful  mission,  he  is  angry  and 
sulks  despondently  as  though  life  were  not  worth 
living.  He  is  disgusted  to  have  become,  perforce, 
himself  the  savior  of  those  whom  he  would  gladly 
have  seen  destroyed.  He  is  chagrined,  not  be- 
cause his  prediction  did  not  come  true,  but  be- 
cause his  own  intolerant  ill-will  for  the  Ninevites 
is  discredited  by  their  sincere  and  ready  response 
to  his  half-hearted  warning.  It  is  an  almost  ludi- 
crous contrast  that  is  presented,  not  unlike  that 
of  the  Pharisee  and  the  publican  in  the  New  Tes- 
tament parable:  inside  the  city  the  whole  popu- 
lation, king  and  people,  and  even  cattle,  repenting 
with  fasting  and  sackcloth;  outside  the  city  the 
querulous  prophet  sitting  and  waiting  with  mali- 


CARTOON  OF  NATIONALISM  221 

cious  hope.  Each  is  thinking  of  God's  possible 
forbearance,  the  one  imploring  it,  the  other  de- 
ploring it. 

Two  other  contrasts  accentuate  the  wilfulness 
of  Jonah's  hatred  of  Nineveh.  One  is  this  same 
impartial  benignity  of  Jehovah,  which  is  the  hope 
of  penitents  but  the  despair  of  the  self-righteous; 
the  other  is  Jonah's  own  concern  over  the  destruc- 
tion of  a  simple  gourd  vine.  Both  are  brought 
into  relief  in  the  closing  verses.  When  the  gourd 
is  destroyed  Jonah  is  just  as  angry  as  when  the 
city  was  saved,  and  again  he  says:  "It  is  better 
for  me  to  die  than  to  live." 

And  God  said  to  Jonah,  Doest  thou  well  to  be  angry 
for  the  gourd?  And  he  said,  I  do  well  to  be  angry, 
even  unto  death.  And  Jehovah  said,  Thou  hast  had 
regard  for  the  gourd,  for  which  thou  hast  not  labored, 
neither  madest  it  grow;  which  came  up  in  the  night, 
and  perished  in  a  night;  and  should  not  I  have  regard 
for  Nineveh,  that  great  city,  wherein  are  more  than 
sixscore  thousand  persons  that  cannot  discern  between 
their  right  hand  and  their  left  hand;  and  also  much 
cattle?  (4:9-11). 

Thus  the  story  of  Jonah  becomes,  like  the 
story  of  Ruth,  a  parable,  or  a  tract,  to  meet  the 
national  exclusiveness  and  racial  pride  of  the 
author's  times.  This  writer  did  not  outspokenly 
oppose  the  current  patriotic  conceit.  To  do  so 
is  often  ineffective,  and  even  dangerous.  But  he 
uses  two  methods  of  correcting  it  indirectly. 


222  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

First,  like  Amos  and  other  prophets,  including 
Jesus  himself,  he  shows  God's  own  catholic  loving- 
kindness  for  other  nations  than  the  people  of  his 
special  choice,  and  implies  that  a  similar  catho- 
licity is  required  of  men.  He  uses  theology  as 
the  teacher  of  ethics.  His  second  method  is 
caricature.  In  Jonah  he  gives  us  the  current 
nationalism — in  a  reductio  ad  dbsurdum.  Nine- 
veh, the  capital  of  an  aggressive  military  despot- 
ism, was  the  classic  historical  enemy  of  the  chosen 
people.  Jonah  represents  the  acme  of  national 
antipathy.  That  Nineveh  is  guilty  the  author 
freely  confesses.  God  knew  its  guilt  and  yet 
wished  to  save  it.  But  Jonah  is  too  good  a  pa- 
triot for  that.  Though  God  himself  commands 
it,  he  will  take  no  part  in  giving  aid  or  comfort 
to  the  enemy.  He  is  fully  aware  of  God's  broader 
sympathy.  But  he  condemns  it  and  bends  every 
effort  to  avoid  sharing  it.  He  will  defy  God 
rather  than  be  like  him.  He  neither  believes 
nor  wishes  to  believe  any  good  of  the  Assyrians. 
He  knows  they  are  wrong,  and  he  is  glad  they 
are.  He  would  leave  them  to  their  deserts.  He 
wants  justice,  not  mercy,  and  he  wants  it  to  the 
bitter  end.  He  has  sympathy  enough,  where 
sympathy  agrees  with  his  own  interests — sym- 
pathy even  with  an  ephemeral  gourd  that  might 
have  saved  him  a  headache;  but  for  innocent 
alien  populations  of  thousands  of  ignorant  and 
misguided  human  beings  he  feels  only  petulant 


CARTOON  OF  NATIONALISM  223 

rage.  In  extreme  type,  Jonah  is  the  natural  out- 
come of  the  moral  pride  of  Pharisaic  Judaism,  or 
of  the  more  modern  national  prejudices  artificially 
fostered  by  war. 


XXIII 

THE   LITERATURE   OF1  SUPPRESSION 

THE  conflict  of  cultures  which  we  have  traced 
both  in  the  settlement  of  Canaan  and  in  post- 
exilic  Judaism  reached  a  new  stage  in  the  era  of 
the  Seleucid  control.  The  prophets  and  patriots 
of  early  Israel  were  conscious  of  the  difference  be- 
tween Israel's  standards  and  those  of  the  peoples 
round  about,  and  had  repeatedly  asserted  the 
need  of  maintaining  their  own  national  standards 
against  the  natural  incursions  of  foreign  influence, 
both  political  and  religious.  In  the  exile  this 
need  became  even  more  acute,  as  we  have  seen 
in  a  preceding  chapter.  Without  political  unity 
and  independence  the  distinctive  civilization  of 
Israel  was  threatened  with  eclipse  by  the  national 
cultures  of  their  more  powerful  masters,  or  ab- 
sorption in  the  growing  denationalization  of  the 
newer  cosmopolitanism.  Under  the  Persian  em- 
pire many  Jews  had  accepted  Aramaic,  the  lingua 
franca  of  southwestern  Asia,  in  place  of  their 
native  tongue,  and  had  adopted  many  of  the 
religious,  industrial,  and  cultural  elements  of 
their  tolerant  and  broad-minded  masters.  It  was 
impossible  to  resist  a  culture  that  was  so  pervasive 
and  catholic. 

224 


LITERATURE  OF  SUPPRESSION          225 

Still  more  was  the  breakdown  of  distinctive 
nationalism  inevitable  in  the  era  which  followed 
Alexander's  conquest  when  he  and  the  other 
Macedonian  generals  who  inherited  and  divided 
his  empire  became  the  conscious  and  active  prop- 
agators of  Hellenic  culture.  The  natives  usually 
accepted  gladly  a  share  in  the  task  of  Helleniza- 
tion.  At  royal  request,  we  are  told,  the  Jews  of 
Egypt  converted  their  scriptures  into  a  Greek 
classic  or  accepted  citizenship  or  responsible  offices 
in  the  city-states.  Not  only  in  foreign  lands  and 
Greek  cities,  like  Alexandria  and  Antioch,  were 
the  Jews  influenced  by  Hellenic  culture,  but  even 
in  Palestine  the  same  tendency  was  making  head- 
way. Of  course  there  were  rigorists  among  the 
Jews — conservatives  intolerant  of  all  innovation, 
religious  zealots  protesting  against  alien  worships, 
national  patriots  of  the  stamp  of  Elijah  or  Nehe- 
miah.  But  the  new  element  which  changed  the 
whole  problem  of  the  conflict  of  cultures  was  the 
use  of  force  by  the  Hellenizers. 

The  processes  of  gradual  denationalization 
which  preceded  the  Maccabean  era  were  sponta- 
neous, natural,  and  often  subconscious.  What- 
ever victories  the  cultures  of  Persia  and  Greece 
had  secured  had  been  made  by  the  political  pres- 
tige of  their  exponents  and  their  own  inherent 
merits  and  conveniences,  not  by  the  use  of  the 
sword.  The  splendid  civilization  of  Greece  in 
more  or  less  superficial  form  was  already  conquer- 


226  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

ing  the  East  and  was  destined  soon  to  lead  cap- 
tivity captive  in  the  West.  Even  Rome  yielded 
to  the  spell  of  Greece.  Among  the  Jews  the  in- 
fluence was  less  than  perhaps  anywhere  else,  but 
there,  too,  Hellenization  seemed  inevitable.  There 
was,  of  course,  an  anti-Hellenic  party  in  Jerusa- 
lem, but  among  the  common  people  the  drift 
toward  newer  customs  was  natural  and  willing, 
and  the  leaders  of  the  aristocratic  state-Hhe 
priestly  families  and  the  men  of  education  and  of 
wealth — openly  espoused  the  new  culture,  its 
athletics,  its  politics,  its  language,  and  its  dress. 
They  were  proud  to  be  philhellenes.  They  be- 
came scornful  of  the  older  ways  but  not  intol- 
erant. Such  intolerance  as  existed  was  mostly 
on  the  other  side. 

To  the  hated  Antiochus  Epiphanes  (175-164 
B.  c.)  are  attached  the  odium  and  the  folly  of  a 
new  policy  in  international  relations — the  en- 
forced imposition  of  an  alien  culture  and  the 
attempted  denationalization  of  Judaism.  The 
story  as  told  by  the  Books  of  Maccabees  may  be 
colored  with  legend  and  prejudice,  and  it  is  pos- 
sible that  the  movement  once  started  had  other 
and  more  violent  sponsors  than  the  ill-fated 
Antiochus.  But  whatever  its  origin  and  history 
the  effort  at  enforced  Hellenization  had  momen- 
tous consequences. 

Politically  it  was  a  challenge  to  the  nation, 
and  resulted  in  the  revival  of  national  life.  As 


LITERATURE  OF  SUPPRESSION  227 

often  happens,  their  methods  of  coercion  worked 
the  very  reverse  of  what  the  Hellenizers  desired. 
The  least  interference  from  outside  at  once  crys- 
tallized the  Jewish  people  into  new  national  self- 
consciousness  and  power.  Those  who  were  for- 
merly drifting  to  Hellenism  revolted  at  the  first 
hint  of  enforcement  and  rallied  round  the  nation- 
alists. All  new  unrest,  all  old  conservatism,  was 
focussed  by  the  definiteness  of  the  issue.  The 
spirit  of  earlier  days  was  revived,  and  the  hope  of 
national  independence  was  not  only  aroused  but 
actually  realized.  In  the  astonishing  early  suc- 
cess of  the  Maccabean  revolt  one  can  still  see  writ 
large  the  inevitable  consequences  of  any  effort  to 
superimpose  a  new  culture  on  a  foreign  nation  by 
the  use  of  force;  while  in  the  subsequent  secu- 
larization of  the  Hasmonean  dynasty  one  can 
read  the  equally  ironical  destiny  that  ultimately 
defeats  the  very  purposes  of  those  who  would 
defend  spiritual  ideals  against  such  aggressions 
by  the  use  of  force.  Both  Antiochus  and  the 
Maccabees  failed.  Victory  lay  chiefly  with  those 
who  practised  passive  resistance — a  phenomenon 
which,  together  with  martyrdom  and  with  perse- 
cution, secured  its  first  great  historical  examples 
at  this  era.  Under  the  stress  of  disaster  and  sup- 
pression a  new  and  powerful  loyalty  was  kindled. 
Men  were  stirred  to  defend  not  merely  their  homes 
and  persons,  but  their  principles  and  ideals.  And 
they  believed  that  resolute  allegiance  to  these; 


228  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

objects  of  devotion  could  not  be  quenched  by  fire 
or  sword.  The  soul  of  man  could  be  free  and  the 
soul  of  the  nation  could  be  free  amid  persecution 
and  suppression.  The  supreme  power  of  reason 
and  of  truth  was  discovered.1  This  new  loyalty 
was  often  attended  with  the  faith  of  despair,  often 
with  hope,  often,  also,  alas,  with  violent  hatred. 
But  it  is  this  sentiment  rather  than  the  martial 
victories  of  Judas  that  left  upon  the  pages  of .  the 
Old  Testament  the  national  ideals  of  the  age. 

For  the  expression  of  these  ideals  two  new  lit- 
erary forms  came  into  current  use — the  apocalypse 
and  the  historical  romance.  Both  of  these  forms 
have  roots  in  the  earlier  literature — the  one  in 
prophecy,  the  other  in  history — but  both  of  them 
became  the  favorite  media  of  nationalist  propa- 
ganda. To  a  certain  extent  the  circumstances 
determined  their  form.  Both  of  them  were  fic- 
tion, and  both  of  them  thereby  escaped  the  pun- 
ishment of  more  direct  pamphlets.  Like  the  fic- 
tion of  autocratic  Russia,  they  were  able  to  instil 
ideals  of  political  revolution  without  interference 
by  the  strict  censorship  of  secret  police  or  by 
open  suppression. 

The  novelette  or  patriotic  hero-tale  was  easily 
developed  from  the  pragmatic  histories  of  Juda- 
ism. Already  full  and  reliable  records  had  been 
edited  in  the  interests  of  certain  national  ideals. 

1See  the  philosophic  discussions  in  IV  Maccabees  and 
I  Esdras  3:1-5  :  6. 


LITERATURE  OF  SUPPRESSION          229 

Many  less  authentic  traditions  still  unrecorded 
lent  themselves  to  similar  treatment,  and  it  was 
possible  to  create  about  mere  names  or  memories 
of  the  past  or  customs  of  the  present,  edifying 
tales  of  ancient  patriotism.  A  historical  setting 
not  unlike  that  present  to  the  author  could  easily 
be  found  and  described  with  a  little  superficial 
use  of  the  imagination.  Anachronisms  and  con- 
fusions could  scarcely  be  avoided  entirely,  and  can 
usually  be  detected  in  literature  of  this  type. 
Two  themes  in  particular  are  characteristic  of 
these  romances — the  fidelity  of  Jews  to  their 
national  and  religious  customs  in  the  face  of  per- 
secution, and  their  signal  triumph  over  their  foes. 
This  triumph,  as  has  been  said,  is  not  merely  the 
victory  in  battle.  It  is  often  due  to  the  devices 
of  clever  men  or  the  miraculous  intervention  of 
God.  The  deaths  of  the  persecutors  are  often 
dwelt  upon  in  the  spirit  of  gleeful  revenge,  and  as 
illustrations  of  the  inevitable  nemesis  that  must 
ever  await  the  enemy  of  the  Jews.  In  the  Books 
of  Maccabees,  where  this  motif  appears,  no- 
tably in  the  stories  of  the  death  of  Antiochus 
Epiphanes 1  and  of  the  death  of  Nicanor,1  the  situ- 
ation is  largely  historical,  but  in  the  stories  of 
Judith  and  of  Esther  there  is  a  large  element  of 
invention.  In  both  the  latter  a  Jewess  is  the 
savior  of  her  race  from  the  hands  of  those  who 

1 1  Mac.  6:1-17;  II  Mac.  9:1-29. 
2 II  Mac.  15:1-37. 


230  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

would  destroy  it,  and  the  agent  of  divine  ven- 
geance upon  its  foes.  In  Judith  the  names  used 
by  the  author  are  pseudonyms  and  stand  for 
really  historical  persons.  -  Thus  Nebuchadnezzar 
represents  Antiochus  Epiphanes;  the  Assyrians, 
the  Syrians;  Nineveh,  Antioch;  and  Arphaxad, 
Arsaces  of  Persia,  with  whom  Antiochus  went  to 
war.1  In  Esther,  on  the  contrary,  the  names  are 
mostly  Persian,  like  the  setting,  but,  except 
Ahasuerus  (=  Xerxes),  appear  to  be  names  of 
gods !  The  story  of  777  Maccabees  seems  to  be 
a  combination  of  truth  and  fiction,  or,  rather,  a 
confusion  of  several  ancient  stories,  due,  perhaps, 
to  its  effort  "to  combine  in  a  single  picture  as 
many  features  as  possible,  all  tending  to  the 
glorification  of  the  faithful  Jew.  We  thus  have 
brought  together  in  a  single  canvas  the  frustrated 
attempt  to  enter  the  temple,  the  saving  of  the 
king's  life  by  a  Jew,  the  attacks  on  religion  and 
attempts  to  Hellenize,  affecting  both  the  Jews  in 
Alexandria  and  in  Egypt  as  a  whole,  the  testimo- 
nies to  their  great  influence  and  unswerving  loy- 
alty, the  marvels  of  divine  intervention,  and  the 
vengeance  on  renegades."2  Many  of  the  stories 
which  Josephus  tells  of  this  period,  for  example, 
that  of  Joseph,  the  tax-gatherer,  who  got  the  bet- 
ter of  the  Gentiles  both  in  securing  a  contract 

1  Charles,  Religious  Development  between  the  Old  and  New 
Testaments,  p.  193. 

2  Emmet,  in  Charles,  Apocrypha  and  Pseudepigrapha  of  the 
0.  T.,  1,160  /. 


LITERATURE  OF  SUPPRESSION  231 

from  court  and  in  inflicting  heavier  taxes  upon 
them  than  upon  his  fellow  countrymen,  have  at 
least  passed  through  this  spirit  of  the  patriotic 
tale.1 

The  faithfulness  of  the  Jews  to  their  own  cus- 
toms is  also  illustrated  in  some  of  the  books  we 
have  mentioned.  In  Judith  it  is  carefully  noted 
that  in  spite  of  the  difficulties  in  the  way  the 
heroine  was  faithful  to  the  national  customs, 
especially  the  observance  of  the  food  regulations 
and  of  the  sacred  seasons.  In  Esther  Hainan's 
excuse  for  destroying  the  Jews  was  the  fact  that 
"their  laws  are  diverse  from  those  of  every  other 
people;  neither  keep  they  the  king's  laws:  there- 
fore it  is  not  for  the  king's  profit  to  suffer  them." 
It  was,  of  course,  the  refusal  to  sacrifice  to  foreign 
gods  and  to  eat  forbidden  food  that  produced  the 
martyrs  of  the  Maccabean  age.  The  stories  of 
those  faithful  who  refused  to  Hellenize  are  found 
idealized  in  the  sixth  and  seventh  chapters  of 
II  Maccabees  and  in  the  later  version  of  IV  Mac- 
cabees. 

The  other  new  type  of  literature  that  belongs 
to  the  new  patriotism  is  the  apocalypse.  The 
word  means  revelation  and  the  form  of  the  writing 
is  usually  the  report  of  a  dream  or  vision.  As  the 
author  of  the  novelette  usually  selected  some  his- 
torical person  as  the  hero,  so  in  the  apocalypse 
an  approved  leader  of  Israel  is  the  authority  for 
1  Josephus,  Antiquities,  XII,  4. 


232  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

the  revelation.  In  fact,  since  the  apocalypse  pur- 
ported to  be  a  prediction  of  the  future,  an  ancient 
worthy  was  essential  as  a  pseudonym.  There 
were  two  reasons,  one  the  current  belief  that  spon- 
taneous prophecy  was  extinct,  the  other  the  de- 
vice of  giving  the  predictions  credibility  by  in- 
cluding in  the  form  of  prediction  the  history  of 
many  past  years.  The  apocalypse,  like  the  his- 
torical romance,  aimed  to  inspire  courage  and 
patience  among  the  persecuted.  It  revealed  the 
hand  of  God  running  through  history,  and  it 
assured  the  faithful  that  the  final  and  decisive 
act  was  near  when  they  should  be  rewarded  and 
their  persecutors  punished.  Apocalypse  thus  in- 
herited the  moral  standards  and  the  national  hope 
of  prophecy.  It  could  scarcely  be  better  sum- 
marized than  in  the  prophetic  passage: 

"  Write  down  the  vision  and  make  it  plain  upon  tablets, 
That  he  may  run  who  reads  it. 
For  the  vision  is  still  for  times  yet  to  be  appointed; 
Yea,  it  hastens  to  fulfilment  and  shall  not  fail; 
Though  it  linger,  wait  for  it; 
For  it  shall  surely  come,  it  will  not  tarry. 
Behold  the  wicked — his  soul  fainteth  in  him, 
But  the  righteous — he  liveth  by  his  faithfulness."1 

But  the  written  form  of  apocalypse,  its  extrava- 
gance of  symbolism,  its  angels  and  dualism,  its 
speculative  interests  in  cosmology  and  in  the 
future  life  of  the  individual,  were  all  new  features, 
1Hab.  2:2-4  (Kent's  translation). 


LITERATURE  OF  SUPPRESSION  233 

due  either  to  the  circumstances  of  the  times  or  to 
the  new  interests  and  influences  of  the  writer's 
day. 

It  would  be  impossible  to  review  in  full  all  the 
examples  of  these  types  of  literature.  Of  the 
historical  romances  we  have  already  mentioned 
several;  one  of  them,  Esther,  is  still  in  our  Old 
Testament  canon.  Of  the  apocalyptic  literature 
we  have  also  some  representatives  in  our  Bible, 
but  here,  again,  the  bulk  of  the  material  belongs 
to  other  canons  than  that  which  we  have  inherited. 
Much  of  the  prophetic  writing  was  already  tend- 
ing to  apocalypse.  Ezekiel  and  Zechariah  are 
filled  with  its  machinery  of  angels,  visions,  and 
symbols.  But  for  apocalypse  proper  we  shall 
have  to  turn  to  the  latest  additions  to  Isaiah 
(e.  g.,  24-27)  and  Zechariah  (9-14),  and  to  the 
great  apocalyptic  literature  which,  beginning 
with  the  second  century,  blossomed  so  profusely 
in  Judaism  and  was  carried  over  into  Christianity 
to  meet  the  kindred  needs  of  the  early  church's 
darkest  hours. 

There  is  one  volume,  however,  which,  if  not  the 
pioneer,  is  at  least  an  early  and  excellent  example 
of  both  these  types  of  literature,  and  it  may  be 
well  for  us  to  examine  it  more  closely.  The  Book 
of  Daniel,  it  is  now  pretty  generally  agreed,  is  a 
work  not  of  the  Persian  but  of  a  later  period.  In 
authorship  it  is  probably  composite,  as  it  is  in 
language.  Much  if  not  all  of  it  belongs  in  date 


234  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

precisely  to  the  early  years  of  the  Maccabean 
revolt.  Its  stories,  although  associated  with  an 
ancient  figure,  Daniel,1  and  furnished  with  a 
setting  in  the  days  of  Nebuchadnezzar  and  the 
waning  power  of  Babylon,  are  nevertheless  but  a 
thin  disguise  for  the  experiences  of  the  Maccabean 
martyrs.  Daniel  and  his  friends  are  of  the  strait- 
est  sect  of  the  Jews.  They  will  not  eat  the 
king's  meat,  but  confine  themselves  to  a  strictly 
"kosher"  diet.  Yet  they  prosper  physically  and 
in  favor  with  God  and  man.  Like  Esther  and 
Joseph,  they  receive  special  favor  and  recognition 
from  the  king.  At  last  they  are  brought  up 
against  the  challenge  of  conscription  of  conscience. 
The  proscribing  of  all  worship  except  that  of 
Nebuchadnezzar's  golden  image,  and  of  all  prayer 
except  to  Darius  the  king,  are  two  covert  parallels 
to  the  Seleucid's  plans  to  enforce  Hellenization. 
But  the  spirit  of  resolute  fidelity  to  national  insti- 
tutions, of  quiet  passive  resistance  against  intoler- 
ance and  persecution,  fortifies  and  finally  justifies 
the  heroes.  It  is  noteworthy,  however,  that  here, 
as  in  Esther  and  as  possibly  under  Antiochus 
Epiphanes  himself,  the  instigators  of  these  difficul- 
ties are  not  the  royal  persons  themselves  but  their 
officers  and  other  malicious  enemies  of  the  Jews. 
And  here,  as  there,  the  faithful  Jews  are  rewarded 
and  see  the  fate  which  they  have  escaped  visited 
upon  those  who  had  tried  to  trap  them.  Yet 
.  14:14,20;  28:3. 


LITERATURE  OF  SUPPRESSION  235 

their  courage  is  mere  unflinching  obedience,  their 
stand  is  taken  with  no  assurance  of  rescue.  In 
the  face  of  almost  certain  execution  as  conscien- 
tious objectors,  they  make  this  defiant  reply:  "If 
our  God  whom  we  serve  be  able  to  deliver  us,  he 
will  deliver  us  from  the  burning  fiery  furnace, 
and  out  of  thy  hand,  O  king.  But  if  not,  be  it 
known  unto  thee,  0  king,  that  we  will  not  serve 
thy  gods,  nor  worship  the  golden  image  which 
thou  hast  set  up."1  It  was  this  spirit  more  than 
the  victories  of  Judas  or  the  political  diplomacy 
of  Jonathan  that  conserved  the  national  ideals  of 
Judaism  in  the  days  of  their  severest  testing. 

The  apocalyptic  passages  of  Daniel  are  a  series 
of  parallel  visions  in  the  second  and  also  in  the 
last  six  chapters  of  the  book.  They  are  symbolic 
outlines  of  the  world's  history  from  the  time  of 
Daniel  through  the  crisis  of  165  B.  c.  Four  suc- 
cessive kingdoms  are  represented  by  the  four 
materials  of  the  image  which  the  king  saw,  or  by 
the  four  beasts  of  DaniePs  vision.  The  last  of 
them  is  the  divided  empire  of  Alexander,  after 
which  "  shall  the  God  of  heaven  set  up  a  kingdom 
which  shall  never  be  destroyed,  nor  shall  the  sov- 
ereignty thereof  be  left  to  another  people;  but  it 
shall  break  in  pieces  and  consume  all  these  king- 
doms, and  it  shall  stand  for  ever."  This  is  sym- 
bolized not  by  a  beast  but  by  "one  like  unto  a 
son  of  man  coming  with  the  clouds  of  heaven." 
Daniel  3:17,  18,  margin. 


236  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

This  is  the  "kingdom  of  the  saints  of  the  Most 
High."  It  marks  the  triumph  of  the  Jewish 
national  hope. 

But  it  is  plain  that  the  author's  chief  interest 
is  not  in  the  future  Golden  Age  but  in  his  own 
time,  the  closing  period  of  the  fourth  kingdom. 
In  Chapter  XI,  for  example,  he  traces  elaborately 
and  fully  the  succession  of  Seleucid  kings  (horns), 
their  wars  and  alliances  with  the  Ptolemies,  'and 
especially  the  career  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes, 
and  his  sacrilege  and  persecutions  in  Jerusalem  in 
league  with  the  apostate  Hellenizing  Jews.  These 
are  "the  abomination  of  desolation"  and  the 
great  tribulation,  but  they  are  the  prelude  to  the 
time  of  the  end.  The  author  ventures  an  exact 
prophecy  of  the  duration  of  this  trial — 1,290  or 
1,335  days.  A  more  general  calendar  prophecy 
is  the  explanation  of  Jeremiah's  seventy  weeks — 
which  divide  the  interval  from  the  fall  of  Jerusa- 
lem to  the  full  end  into  seventy  seven-year  periods 
— seven  weeks  to  the  rebuilding  of  Jerusalem, 
sixty-two  more  under  the  anointed  prince  until 
the  destruction  of  city  and  sanctuary,  and  a  final 
week  or  half  week  (three  and  one-half  years)  of 
unmitigated  woe. 

But  these  outlines  of  culminating  sorrow  were 
not  intended  as  threats.  They  were  words  of 
consolation  for  those  who  could  plainly  see  that 
they,  themselves,  were  living  in  the  last  days. 
They  were  a  counsel  of  patient  endurance  and 


LITERATURE  OF  SUPPRESSION  237 

hope.  "Blessed  is  he  that  waiteth,  and  cometh 
to  the  thousand  three  hundred  and  five  and  thirty 
days."  The  arrogant  king  that  magnifies  him- 
self above  every  god  shall  come  to  a  miserable 
end,  and  they  that  are  wise,  though  they  shall 
fall  by  the  sword  and  by  flame,  by  captivity  and 
by  spoil  many  days,  shall  at  last  shine  as  the 
brightness  of  the  firmament. 

Such,  in  brief,  was  the  Hebrew  literature  of 
suppression.  In  its  composite  fiction,  in  its  spirit 
of  revenge,  in  its  grotesque  symbolism,  it  has  lit.- 
tle  of  attraction  in  the  present  day,  in  either  form 
or  contents.  The  secret  hatred  of  Syria  or  Rome 
need  no  longer  be  concealed  under  fictions  and 
analogies,  and  faith  no  longer  needs  the  assurance 
of  numerical  enigmas  or  edifying  romances.  But 
this  literature  is  still  a  monument  to  a  deep  and 
admirable  national  self-consciousness  that  braved 
the  threats  of  a  forced  denationalization  and  won 
its  permanence  through  the  power  of  the  written 
word.  As  compared  with  the  methods  of  the 
warriors,  these  exponents  of  passive  resistance 
proved  afresh  that  the  pen  is  mightier  than  the 
sword.  And  however  one  may  regret  that  Hel- 
lenism and  Judaism,  the  two  great  complemen- 
tary cultures  of  antiquity,  when  they  first  met, 
met  as  implacable  enemies  instead  of  sympathetic 
friends,  one  can  still  be  thankful  for  the  high 
courage  of  those  Hebrew  patriots  who  out  of  the 
darkest  experiences  of  life  still  held  fast  to  the 


238  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

national  heritage  which  seemed  threatened,  and 
learned  to  trust  in  God  and  in  the  ultimate  tri- 
umph of  his  will  in  the  destiny  of  both  men  and 
nations, — whether  by  evolution  or  by  miracle, 
whether  in  this  world  or  in  the  world  to  come. 


XXIV 

THE   MESSIANIC   HOPE 

THE  ideals  of  Israel,  as  we  have  sketched  them 
through  the  successive  centuries  of  national  life, 
contain  a  great  variety  of  elements,  and  at  the 
same  time  a  striking  continuity  of  spirit.  The 
variety  is  due  not  only  to  the  different  tempera- 
ments within  the  race,  but  to  the  different  his- 
torical experiences  through  which  the  people 
passed.  For  while  in  these  days,  when  history 
is  so  often  misrepresented  as  the  mechanical 
result  of  material  and  economic  laws,  one  cannot 
stress  too  emphatically  the  creative  power  of 
ideals  on  national  life,  yet  one  must  not  overlook 
the  determining  effect  of  historical  circumstances 
upon  the  ideals  of  the  nation. 

But  the  ideals  of  Israel,  as  we  have  repeatedly 
declared,  long  outlived  the  situation  which  pro- 
duced them,  and  in  the  later  ages  of  Judaism 
these  accumulations  of  the  past  were  imperfectly 
combined  in  a  composite  national  hope.  Al- 
though the  immediate  fulfilment  of  this  hope  was 
always  an  urgent  desire  and  often  a  confident 
expectation,  in  later  Judaism,  much  more  than  in 
the  earlier  times,  it  bore  little  direct  relation  to 
the  present  conditions.  It  was  not  merely  a 
next  step  in  national  evolution,  but  the  ultimate 

239 


240  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

ideal.  Its  immediate  fulfilment  was  possible  only 
by  a  miracle.  And  for  that  reason  it  was  either 
unconsciously  postponed  into  a  vague  future  or 
was  transferred  to  another  and  heavenly  world. 
Such,  at  least,  was  the  transformation  which 
the  Jewish  national  hope  experienced  at  the  hands 
of  its  post-canonical  exponents,  especially  the 
apocalyptic  writers.  But  the  Old  Testament  it- 
self, to  which  our  present  study  is  limited,  still 
retained  the  more  earthly  ideal  of  a  perfect  state 
on  earth.  Throughout  the  prophetic  writings  fre- 
quent passages  embody  this  expectation.  Their 
date  and  authorship  are  often  uncertain;  they  may 
cover  several  centuries.  Two  of  the  most  exten- 
sive belong  to  the  period  that  is  called  the  exile 
proper:  Ezekiel's  "constitution  of  the  restored 
theocracy,"  and  the  anonymous  prophecy  or  col- 
lection of  prophecies  concerning  Israel's  restora- 
tion that  follow  the  prophecies  of  Isaiah.1  But 
many  shorter  passages,  including  certain  poetic 
sections  in  the  historical  books,  and  even  some  of 
the  Psalms,  belong  to  this  class  of  writing,  whether, 
as  some  still  maintain,  they  are  of  pre-exilic  date, 
or  whether  they  belong  to  that  lengthened  exile 
and  subjection  of  the  Jews  that  continued  to  the 
Maccabean  era  and  beyond  it. 

The  chief  elements  in  the  Hebrew  Utopia  are 

*Ezek.  40-48;  Isaiah  40-55  or  40-66.  For  a  convenient 
collection  of  the  miscellaneous  prophetic  material  on  this 
subject  see  the  closing  sections  of  Kent's  Student's  Old  Testa- 
ment, Vol.  3. 


THE  MESSIANIC  HOPE  241 

simple  and  familiar.  It  will  be  a  nation  enjoying 
all  the  forms  of  prosperity  that  experience  and 
imagination  can  suggest.  Politically  the  Hebrews 
will  become  not  only  independent  but  trium- 
phant. They  will  be  the  rulers  of  the  world,  and 
Jerusalem  will  be  the  centre  of  a  world  empire. 
The  lurid  features  of  this  programme  were  ex- 
pressed by  the  euphemistic  promise  that  they 
should  see  their  desire  upon  their  enemies.  A 
crushing  victory  will  be  followed  by  universal 
and  permanent  peace.  The  tribute  of  all  nations 
will  flow  into  their  treasuries,  nature  itself  will 
yield  richer  and  more  frequent  harvests.  Death 
will  be  postponed  beyond  four-score  years  of 
labor  and  sorrow  to  the  six-score  years  of  the  patri- 
archs, or  else  will  be  abolished  entirely.  Sorrow 
and  sighing,  disease  and  suffering,  will  disappear. 
Moral  improvement  will  correspond  to  the  ma- 
terial advantages,  although  few  passages  lay  em- 
phasis upon  it.  It  will  not  be  freedom  from 
temptation  but  a  fuller  achievement  of  present 
standards  and  a  cleansing  by  suffering  and  by 
grace.  "A  fountain  shall  be  opened  .  .  .  for  sin 
and  for  uncleanness."  The  remnant  which  is 
left  shall  be  thoroughly  pure.  Only  the  faithful 
shall  remain — a  people  humble  and  poor.  Jeru- 
salem's blood  stains  shall  be  purged  from  her 
midst,  "by  the  breath  of  judgment  and  by  the 
breath  of  burning."1  Violence,  deceit,  and  idol- 
13:1;  Zeph.  3:12;  Isaiah  4:4  (Kent's  translation). 


242  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

atry  shall  disappear.  Justice  shall  reign  in  high 
places. 

But  upon  no  feature  of  this  hope  for  the  ideal 
nation  have  Christian  scholars  looked  with  greater 
interest  than  upon  the  figure  of  the  Messiah,  or 
anointed  ruler.  From  his  title  the  whole  expecta- 
tion is  called  Messianic,  even  when,  as  is  often 
the  case,  there  is  no  explicit  reference  to  him.  In 
fact,  the  material  in  the  prophets  gives  us  but  few 
passages  that  were  originally  intended  as  pic- 
tures of  the  expected  Messiah.  In  many  prophe- 
cies he  is  omitted  entirely,  in  some  he  is  not  an 
individual  but  the  nation  as  a  whole.  In  fact, 
he  holds  no  such  central  place  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment as  he  holds  in  the  early  Christian  interpre- 
tation of  it.  Even  in  Judaism  he  seems  to  have 
assumed  central  importance  chiefly  with  the 
political  effort  of  the  Maccabees  and  in  the  three 
centuries  that  followed  until  the  revolt  of  Bar- 
Cochba  (165  B.  C.-132  A.  D.).  And  yet  in  his 
person  is  summed  up  much  of  the  best  idealism 
of  the  whole  national  hope. 

Most  often  he  is  associated  with  David,  the 
ideal  Hebrew  monarch.  He  is  either  a  David 
rediviviis  or  a  prince  of  the  Davidic  house  who 
shall  renew  the  memories  of  his  ancestor.  He 
comes  again  from  Bethlehem — a  branch  springing 
up  from  the  stock  of  Jesse,  like  a  shoot  from  the 
roots  of  a  fallen  tree.  In  familiar  passages  the 
supreme  qualities  and  service  of  this  ideal  ruler 
are  described: 


THE  MESSIANIC  HOPE  243 

"The  spirit  of  Jehovah  shall  rest  upon  him, 
A  spirit  of  wisdom  and  insight, 
A  spirit  of  counsel  and  might, 
A  spirit  of  knowledge  and  the  fear  of  Jehovah. 

He  will  not  judge  according  to  what  his  eyes  see, 
Nor  decide  according  to  what  his  ears  hear; 
But  with  righteousness  will  he  judge  the  helpless, 
And  with  equity  will  he  decide  for  the  needy  in  the 

land. 

He  will  smite  an  oppressor  with  the  rod  of  his  mouth, 
And  with  the  breath  of  his  lips  will  he  slay  the  guilty. 
Righteousness,  will  be  the  girdle  about  his  loins, 
And  faithfulness  the  band  about  his  waist"  (Isaiah 

11:2-5,  Kent). 

"And  dominion  shall  rest  upon  his  shoulder; 
And  his  name  will  be  Wonderful  Counsellor, 
Godlike  Hero,  Ever-watchful  Father,  Prince  of  Peace. 
To  the  increase  of  his  dominion  and  to  the  peace 

there  shall  be  no  end, 

On  the  throne  of  David  and  throughout  his  kingdom, 
To  establish  and  uphold  it  by  justice  and  righteous- 
ness 

Henceforth  and  forever.    The  jealousy  of  Jehovah 
will  accomplish  this"  (Isaiah  9:6,  7,  Kent). 

"  Rejoice  greatly,  O  daughter  of  Zion  I 
Shout  aloud,  O  daughter  of  Jerusalem  I 
Behold  thy  king  will  come  to  thee; 
Vindicated  and  victorious  is  he, 
Humble,  and  riding  upon  an  ass, 
Upon  the  foal  of  an  ass. 
He  shall  cut  off  chariots  from  Ephraim, 
And  horses  from  Jerusalem; 
The  battle  bow  shall  also  be  cut  off, 


244  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

And  he  shall  speak  peace  to  the  nations; 
His  rule  shall  be  from  sea  to  sea, 
From  the  river  to  the  ends  of  the  earth"  (Zech.  9:9, 
10,  Kent). 

Such,  in  brief  summary,  was  the  scope  of  the 
varied  predictions  of  national  destiny  and  of  the 
ideal  ruler  who  should  realize  them  in  his  own 
person.  But  when  one  turns  from  an  analysis  of 
this  hope  to  a  consideration  of  its  effective  power, 
one  is  impressed  by  its  extraordinary  longevity 
and  influence.  Through  various  vicissitudes  of  a 
whole  millennium  there  burned  constantly  this 
undying  optimism.  And  for  a  millennium  and  a 
half  longer  it  continued  in  the  form  of  apocalyptic, 
by  which  "the  courage  and  persistency  of  the 
Jews  in  their  faith,  their  indomitable  hope  under 
persecution,  their  scorn  of  death,  were  all  nour- 
ished from  the  time  of  the  Maccabees  down  to 
the  thirteenth  century  A.  D."  l  The  assurance  of 
the  nation's  destiny  grew  rather  than  diminished 
in  the  course  of  time.  Neither  could  success 
ever  entirely  fulfil  it  nor  disaster  destroy  it. 
Even  in  the  times  of  severest  strain  and  discour- 
agement the  exiles  of  Israel  were  "prisoners  of 
hope."  2  Such  an  idealism  was  not  the  unique 
possession  of  Israel.  "All  nations  that  are  worth 
anything,"  as  an  American  historian  reminds  us, 

^Charles,  Religious  Development  between  the  Old  and  New 
Testaments,  p.  44. 
2  Zech.  9:12. 


THE  MESSIANIC  HOPE  245 

"always  have  had  and  always  will  have  some 
ideal  of  national  destiny,  and  without  it  would 
soon  disappear,  and  would  deserve  their  fate."  l 
The  striking  thing  about  the  nationalism  of  the 
ancient  and  of  the  modern  Hebrew  is  the  strength 
and  flexibility  of  this  perennial  hope. 

The  basis  for  this  dauntless  optimism  was 
neither  national  conceit  nor  blind  utopianism, 
but  a  religious  faith.  It  was  the  faith  in  Jehovah 
that  carried  them  through  the  first  struggle  of 
their  history,  and  it  was  the  same  faith  that  in- 
spired them  until  the  end.  In  the  words  of  a 
recent  writer: 

Jehovah  was  the  God  of  Israel,  and  Israel  the  people 
of  Jehovah,  from  the  day  of  the  great  deliverance  from 
Egypt.  Out  of  that  national  faith  sprang  the  hope  of 
the  nation,  its  confidence  in  Jehovah's  ultimate  pur- 
pose to  bless  His  people.  One  of  the  wonderful  things 
in  the  religion  of  Israel  is  the  vitality  of  this  hope 
through  changing  fortunes,  and  amid  overwhelming 
disasters,  as  displayed  in  its  adaptability  and  recupera- 
tive powers,  its  reinterpretation  of  the  methods  of  God 
without  forfeiture  of  faith  in  His  redemptive  purpose. 
That  which  the  New  Testament  declares  of  a  single 
generation  is  not  less  true  of  the  thousand  years  of 
Israel's  varied  history:  "This  is  the  victory  that  hath 
overcome  the  world,  even  our  faith."  .  .  .  Because 
Israel  belongs  to  Jehovah,  and  can  depend  on  Him,  it 
has  a  future.  The  hope  in  this  future,  springing  from 
the  faith  in  Jehovah,  again  and  again  brings  renewed 

1 E.  D.  Adams,  The  Power  of  Ideals  in  American  History, 
p.  68. 


246  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

strength,  and  becomes  the  chief  instrument  in  the 
maintenance  of  the  "national"  existence.  It  is  true 
that  the  nationalism  which  made  faith  and  hope 
strong  sometimes  narrowed  love  to  the  circle  of  Israel, 
or  even  of  faithful  Israel.  Moreover,  the  forms  in 
which  the  hope  of  the  future  clothed  itself  are  often  to 
us  strangely  inadequate  to  a  spiritual  religion.  Yet  it 
is  to  Israel's  hope  that  we  owe  the  bringing  in  of  the 
Christian  hope;  for  that  hope  is  the  pulse  of  Israel's 
vital  strength,  the  inspiration  of  its  continued  life.,1 

And  when  one  goes  back  a  step  farther  and 
seeks  for  the  basis  of  this  faith,  one  meets  again 
a  great  richness  in  the  Hebrew  ideals.  It  is  not 
that  hope  really  needs  an  explanation  beyond  the 
mere  fact  of  human  nature  or  that  an  inherent 
optimism  is  wont  carefully  to  scrutinize  the 
grounds  of  its  confidence.  Faith  creates  its  own 
foundation  by  experience.  "Faith  is  the  giving 
substance  to  things  hoped  for,  a  test  of  things  not 
seen." 2  And  yet  the  Hebrew  assurance  that 
Jehovah  would  bless  them  was  grounded  through- 
out on  the  nature  of  God,  as  with  changing  em- 
phasis they  conceived  him.  In  the  first  instance, 
no  doubt,  their  hope  in  him  was  because  of  his 
national  preferences;  he  would  save  them  because 
they  were  his  peculiar  people.  It  would  be  for 
his  own  glory.  But  as  the  prophets  exalted 
Jehovah  above  the  level  of  a  merely  national  pa- 

1 H.  Wheeler  Robinson,  The  Religious  Ideas  of  the  Old  Tes- 
tament, pp.  184,  186. 
2  Hebrews  11:1,  margin. 


THE  MESSIANIC  HOPE  247 

tron,  their  confidence  in  him  was  transferred  to 
other  grounds.  When  they  declared  that  his 
gracious  treatment  of  Israel  had  been  or  would 
be  for  his  name's  sake,  they  meant  more  than  the 
vindication  of  his  power  among  the  gods  of  the 
other  nations.  They  meant  that  his  treatment 
would  demonstrate  his  character.  The  prophets 
appealed  also  to  Jehovah's  pride  or  jealousy, 
which  would  not  suffer  him  to  live  below  the 
highest  level  that  they  expected  of  him.  And 
when  they  pictured  the  satisfaction  of  their  hopes 
they  would  add,  "The  zeal  of  Jehovah  will  accom- 
plish this."  They  appealed  to  his  love  of  Israel, 
and  to  his  justice  in  requiting  their  foes  and  in 
rewarding  their  own  faithfulness.  They  looked 
back  to  the  beginning  of  their  history  as  more 
than  an  accident  or  temporary  whim  of  Jehovah. 
He  had  separated  them  from  among  all  the  peo- 
ples of  the  earth  to  be  his  inheritance.1  They 
had  come  to  look  upon  their  reciprocal  relations 
with  Jehovah  as  a  covenant  in  which  Jehovah 
and  Israel  each  voluntarily  accepted  the  other. 
And  God  will  be  faithful  to  his  part  of  the  con- 
tract, as  faithful  as  "the  laws  of  nature": 

If  ye  can  break  my  covenant  of  the  day,  and  my 
covenant  of  the  night,  so  that  there  shall  not  be  day 
and  night  in  their  season;  then  may  also  my  covenant 
be  broken  with  David  my  servant,  that  he  shall  not 
have  a  son  to  reign  upon  his  throne  (Jer.  33:20,  21). 

1 1  Kings  8:53. 


248  NATIONAL  IDEALS     , 

The  term  covenant  to  the  modern  mind  sug- 
gests a  treaty  in  which  each  party's  undertakings 
are  contingent  upon  the  fidelity  of  the  other,  and 
this  feature  was  frequently  present  in  prophetic 
predictions  of  blessing.  But  many  of  God's 
promises  were  looked  upon  by  the  Hebrews  as 
unqualified  and  absolute.  Unfaithfulness  might 
delay  them,  and  faithfulness  might  bring  them 
near,  but  nothing  could  cancel  them.  God  had 
sworn  with  an  oath  and  would  not  repent.  His 
election  of  Israel  was  an  unalterable  relation. 
His  promises  were  yea  and  amen  forever.  Thus 
as  an  ultimate  destiny  the  national  hope  of  Israel 
rested  upon  nothing  less  than  the  promises  of 
God. 

But  the  Hebrew  was  convinced  that  God  not 
only  wished  their  triumph,  but  that  he  could  do 
whatever  he  would.  They  trusted  his  ability  as 
well  as  his  fidelity.  With  their  enlarging  idea  of 
Jehovah's  sphere  went  hand  in  hand  an  enlarging 
conception  of  his  power.  Nothing  was  too  hard 
for  him.  He  could  save  by  many  or  by  few.  All 
the  nations  were  in  his  hand.  He  was  the  creator 
of  things  and  controlled  the  course  of  history. 
The  future  would  manifest  his  purposes  as  the 
past  had  manifested  them.  Thus  the  Hebrew 
hope  rested  upon  the  lessons  of  history.  History 
was  interpreted  spiritually  and  as  the  revelation 
of  God's  purpose.  What  God  has  done,  God  can 
do.  He  saved  Israel  from  Egypt;  he  can  save 


THE  MESSIANIC  HOPE  249 

them  from  Babylon.  He  made  a  great  nation  of 
a  little  one;  he  can  do  it  again.  All  the  forces  of 
nature  are  in  his  hand.  He  can  transform  even 
defeat  into  success. 

It  is  this  reliance  upon  God  as  the  basis  of  the 
national  hope  that  explains  a  feature  of  that  hope 
that  we  have  already  alluded  to.  Though  the 
Old  Testament  writers  consistently  confine  their 
expectation  to  this  earth,  they  lay  little  emphasis 
upon  the  human  leader  or  leaders  through  whom 
their  hope  is  fulfilled.  The  Messiah  is  not  the 
initiator  of  reconstruction  nor  the  real  creator  of 
the  ideal  state.  He  is,  after  all,  only  an  agent 
anointed  and  appointed  by  God.  He  is  second 
and  subservient  to  God,  exalted,  to  be  sure, 
among  men,  yet  merely  the  agent  of  Jehovah. 
Frequently,  as  we  have  said,  the  Messiah  is  con- 
spicuously absent  from  the  outline.  His  place  is 
more  than  filled  by  God.  God,  himself,  is  often 
spoken  of  as  the  true  king  among  his  people,  a 
conception  which  continued  from  an  early  period 
even  through  the  New  Testament.  Whenever 
men  fixed  their  minds  on  the  immediate  political 
achievement  of  their  national  hope  they  thought 
chiefly  of  the  agent  of  liberation,  and  many  of 
them  followed  wandering  fires  of  those  who  cried, 
"Lo,  here  I"  and,  "Lo,  there  I"  It  was  this  false 
expectation  that  gave  Jesus  the  most  eager  and 
the  most  embarrassing  personal  popularity.  But 
whenever  men  sought  to  found  their  hope  not  on 


250  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

political  machinations  but  on  the  more  fundamen- 
tal ideals  of  faith,  then,  like  Jesus  himself,  they 
turned  their  thoughts  away  from  the  programme 
of  a  Messiah  to  confidence  in  the  purpose  of  God. 
Therefore,  though  neither  phrase  occurs  exactly 
in  the  Old  Testament,  its  final  national  ambition 
and  expectation  is  not  so  well  expressed  by  the 
usual  term,  "the  Messianic  hope/'  as  it  is  by  the 
rabbinic  and  Christian  term,  "the  Kingdom*  of 
God." 


XXV 

NATIONALISM  TRANSCENDED 

THE  ideal  of  nationalism  contains  many  fea- 
tures that  seem  hostile  to  the  best  interests  of 
mankind.  It  often  fosters  hatred,  cruelty,  and 
egoism.  An  Oriental  poet,  Rabindranath  Tagore, 
has  freshly  reminded  us  of  the  unlovely  features 
of  our  own  western  nationalism.  And  in  the 
World  War  we  have  seen  the  recrudescence  of  the 
spirit  of  predatory  patriotism  in  all  its  conceit 
and  jealous  ugliness.  In  studying  the  older 
nationalism  of  the  Jews  we  have  found  many  self- 
ish, material,  divisive  forces  which  made  the 
race  the  enemy  of  all  others.  The  present  writer 
would  not  be  misunderstood  as  favoring  all  the 
national  ideals  which  it  has  been  his  duty  to 
record.  On  the  contrary,  he  would  suggest  that 
the  value  of  all  such  narrow  loyalties  lies  chiefly 
in  their  contribution  to  still  higher  forms  of  alle- 
giance. And  just  such  a  surpassing  of  its  own 
frontiers  is  happily  one  of  the  inevitable  results  of 
any  intensified  loyalty.  To  define  limits  is  at 
once  to  transcend  them.  So  the  growth  of  na- 
tionalism slowly  prepares  the  way  for  interna- 
tionalism. 

To  trace  this  transcending  of  nationalism  in 


252  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

late  Judaism  and  in  Christianity  is  a  task  that 
lies  beyond  the  confines  of  this  sketch,  which  has 
been  limited  to  the  Old  Testament.  That  Chris- 
tianity became  the  heir  to  all  the  best  ideals  of 
Judaism,  without  the  limitations  of  race  and 
nation,  is  a  familiar  fact,  and  one  that  explains 
its  superior  catholicity  and  ecumenical  power. 
But  it  may  be  proper  as  a  summary  of  our  pres- 
ent study  to  gather  together  some  of  the  inter- 
national suggestions  and  implications  that  meet 
us  even  before  the  closing  of  the  canon  of  Hebrew 
Scriptures. 

In  the  first  place,  the  experiences  of  their  his- 
tory brought  to  the  Hebrews  a  greatly  widened 
political  horizon.  As  the  earlier  writings  tend  to 
confine  attention  to  Palestine  and  its  immediate 
environs,  the  later  books  show  the  influence  of 
foreign  ideas  and  races.  Conquest  and  exile, 
travel  and  trade,  trained  the  Jews  to  think  in 
imperial  terms.  Nowhere  is  this  more  clearly 
seen  than  in  the  enlargement  of  their  national 
hope.  Modelled  originally  on  their  status  quo 
ante,  or  at  most  upon  the  zenith  of  national  ex- 
pansion under  David,  the  restoration  hope  soon 
surpassed  these  bounds.1  The  restoration  of  the 
original  Israel  was  not  enough;  only  a  far  greater 
empire  could  suffice.  It  was  natural  that  this 
super-state  should  be  conceived  primarily  along 
conventional  lines — as  an  empire  like  those  of 
Isaiah  49:6;  56:8, 


NATIONALISM  TRANSCENDED  253 

Nineveh  or  Tyre.  The  prophets  pictured  Jeru- 
salem as  the  capital  of  a  great  military  despotism, 
as  the  metropolis  of  a  huge  international  com- 
merce. Even  religious  conformity  was  assumed 
as  the  essential  of  such  an  organization,  and  Zion 
was  to  become  a  house  of  prayer  to  all  peoples. 

But  there  were  other  conceptions  of  inter- 
national relations  than  the  imperialist  ideals. 
There  were  many  who  hoped  that  Israel's  suprem- 
acy would  be  not  something  imposed  on  the  na- 
tions, but  their  own  free  choice.  They  were  will- 
ing to  trust  the  inherent  superiority  of  their  own 
God  and  their  religion  to  win  for  themselves  the 
exalted  place  that  they  deserved.  By  a  kind  of 
survival  of  the  fittest  they  awaited  the  time 
when  the  earth  should  be  filled  with  the  knowledge 
of  Jehovah  as  the  waters  cover  the  sea.  "In 
those  days,"  writes  one  of  these  seers,  "ten  men 
shall  take  hold,  out  of  all  the  languages  of  the 
nations,  they  shall  take  hold  of  the  skirt  of  him 
that  is  a  Jew,  saying,  We  will  go  with  you,  for 
we  have  heard  that  God  is  with  you."  1 

To  fulfil  such  a  destiny  no  great  martial  enter- 
prises will  be  needed.  Indeed,  no  great  national 
organization  or  effort  is  required.  Even  active 
missionary  campaigns  are  not  contemplated. 
God  himself  will  draw  the  nations  unto  him. 
The  duty  of  Israel  is  personal  faithfulness  to  its 
ideals.  Zerubbabel  is  to  restore  the  nation,  not  by 


254  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

an  army,  nor  by  power,  but  by  God's  spirit.1  To 
the  prophet  of  the  exile,  as  to  the  author  of  Acts, 
the  duty  of  missions  is  the  duty  of  a  "witness." 
As  a  missionary  nation  the  Jews  are  to  be  God's 
witnesses — the  bearers  of  his  light.  In  the  same 
prophecy  is  incorporated  that  other  splendid  ideal 
of  international  service,  and  the  suggestion  is 
plain  that  it  depends  not  upon  the  exercise  of 
authority,  like  that  of  the  kings  of  the  Gentiles, 
but  upon  the  humble  and  patient  fidelity  of  the 
divinely  instructed  teacher. 

In  another  way  nationalism  was  transcended 
by  the  prophets  through  their  new  emphasis  upon 
morality.  The  transfer  is  most  readily  recognized 
in  their  new  conception  of  God,  who  is  regarded 
as  more  interested  in  righteousness  than  in  Israel, 
his  own  elect  people.  Such  a  moral  interest  runs 
right  across  all  national  lines  of  prejudice,  and 
draws  new  lines  between  the  righteous  and  the 
wicked,  irrespective  of  race  or  creed.  It  is  indif- 
ferent to  the  imagined  advantages  of  Levitical 
ritual.  As  an  anonymous  prophet  declares,  even 
the  Gentiles  offer  as  pure  a  sacrifice  and  honor 
Jehovah's  name  as  greatly  as  do  the  Jews.2  In 
the  books  of  Ruth  and  Jonah,  as  we  have  already 
noted,  occurs  this  same  protest  against  religious 
particularism.  Even  the  great  rivals  of  Israel 
are  not  rejected  in  God's  sight.  God  will  own 
them,  also. 
1  Zech.  4:6,  margin.  2  Malachi  1:11. 


NATIONALISM  TRANSCENDED  255 

In  that  day  shall  Israel  be  the  third  with  Egypt  and 
with  Assyria,  a  blessing  in  the  midst  of  the  earth;  for 
that  Jehovah  of  hosts  hath  blessed  them,  saying, 
Blessed  be  Egypt  my  people,  and  Assyria  the  work  of 
my  hands,  and  Israel  mine  inheritance  (Isaiah  19:24, 
25). 

The  new  emphasis  upon  ethics  not  only  de- 
stroyed national  boundaries,  it  suggested  new 
classifications.  Within  Israel  the  prophets  al- 
ready are  harbingers  of  a  party,  if  not  a  class  con- 
sciousness. The  moral  line  they  draw  often  fol- 
lows very  closely  the  division  between  exploiter 
and  exploited,  rich  and  poor,  aristocracy  and 
proletariat.  Of  international  class  solidarity  we 
see  as  yet  no  suggestions.  Yet  the  lawgivers 
remind  the  slave  owner  that  his  fathers  were  once 
serfs  in  Egypt,  and  they  legislate  against  partiality 
in  law  courts  due  to  the  poverty  of  the  defendant 
or  to  the  multitude  of  his  sympathizers,  quite  as 
much  as  they  deprecate  bribery  by  the  rich. 

In  geographical  setting,  also,  the  standards  of 
the  prophets  tended  to  transcend  national  limita- 
tions. As  far  as  the  Old  Testament  is  concerned, 
the  scene  for  these  projected  ideals  was  always 
thought  of  as  the  earth.  But  it  is  the  whole  earth 
that  is  to  share  the  blessing  and  not  merely  the 
limited  area  of  Palestine  and  the  familiar  environs 
of  Jerusalem.  Sometimes  a  complete  transforma- 
tion of  the  earth  was  included,  with  new  laws  of 
longevity  and  fertility,  and  even  the  taming  of 


256  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

wild  animals.  The  poet  calls  this  a  new  heaven 
and  a  new  earth.1  But  still  it  is  a  real  sky  and 
earth  and  by  no  means  supramundane.  One  of 
the  characteristics  of  the  later  Jewish  idealism — 
found,  also,  in  Christianity — is  the  transfer  of 
this  national  and  international  hope  beyond  the 
earthly  sphere.  In  some  cases,  as  in  the  Book  of 
Revelation,  the  old  and  the  new  ideal  are  com- 
bined. There  is  first  a  temporary  millennium 
upon  earth  and  later  eternal  life  in  heaven.  But 
it  is  the  latter  conception  that  finally  prevailed. 
Zion  became  a  universal  symbol. 

In  accordance  with  this  transcendence  of  na- 
tionalism, apocalyptic  relied  more  and  more  on 
the  supernatural  forces  to  realize  the  national 
hopes.  Already  in  Daniel  we  perceive  that  bat- 
tles on  earth  between  nations  are  really  settled 
by  conflicts  between  their  representatives  in 
heaven.  God  himself  by  miracle  will  establish 
his  kingdom  rather  than  through  the  slow,  pain- 
ful, and  erratic  efforts  of  men.  It  would  be  inter- 
esting to  show  the  manifold  effects  upon  national 
idealism  of  this  expectation  of  a  miraculous  inter- 
position. In  the  modern  premillennial  hope  we 
can  see  something  of  its  various  implications. 
Its  shortcomings  are  well  described  in  a  recent 
essay  by  Professor  Porter  of  Yale.2  Though  "  the 
faults  of  materialism  and  of  self-interest  which 
belong  to  the  naive  nationalism  of  Israel's  begin- 

1  Isaiah  65 : 17-25.  2  Religion  and  the  War,  p.  44. 


NATIONALISM  TRANSCENDED  257 

nings  are  still  present  in  the  conscious  and 
sophisticated  other-worldliness  of  .the  apocalyptic 
hopes,"  nevertheless  the  prejudices  become  politi- 
cal rather  than  religious,  and  the  agencies  are  a 
kind  of  divine  intervention  instead  of  the  petty 
diplomacy  and  warfare  of  human  relationships. 
In  still  another  direction  the  tendencies  in 
Judaism  were  breaking  the  bonds  of  nationalism. 
The  age  was,  as  we  have  declared,  an  era  of  in- 
tensification of  nationalism,  but  that  tendency  by 
no  means  excluded  the  growth  of  individualism 
as  well.  Indeed,  the  older  view  was  that  in  this 
era  individualism  was  taking  the  place  of  nation- 
alism, being  characteristic  of  the  post-exilic  period 
as  the  other  was  characteristic  of  the  pre-exilic 
consciousness.  This  view  is  well  corrected  by 
Professor  Knudson  in  a  chapter  previously  quoted. 
The  exile  neither  ended  nationalism  nor  created 
individualism.  "Nationalism  and  individualism 
in  their  higher  forms,  instead  of  being  mutually 
antithetical,  were  really  mutually  complemen- 
tary." * 

And  yet  individualism  in  religion  or  politics  is 
naturally  the  destroyer  of  the  narrower  national- 
ism. When  the  supreme  relation  in  life  is  be- 
tween man  and  a  universal  God  or  a  universal 
empire,  other  loyalties  are  wont  to  sink  into 
abeyance.  Humanity,  not  nationality,  is  the 
social  group  in  which  intenser  individualism  finds 
1  Knudson,  Religious  Teaching  of  the  Old  Testament,  p.  340. 


258  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

\ 

its  fellowship  and  expression.  As  Judaism  and 
the  whole  world  discovered  in  the  era  of  the 
Roman  Empire,  cosmopolitanism  in  culture,  indi- 
vidualism in  philosophy  and  religion,  internation- 
alism in  politics,  are  natural  concomitants. 

At  any  rate,  the  age  of  which  we  speak  shows 
strongly  in  its  literature  the  intensification  of 
individualism.  As  the  national  unit  was  expand- 
ing into  the  larger  international  conception',  at 
the  same  time  it  was  also  making  room  for  the 
smaller  personal  unit.  While  Ezekiel  and  Jere- 
miah differ  in  their  international  expectation,  the 
former  excluding,  the  latter  including,  the  Gen- 
tiles, they  agree  upon  their  emphasis  on  personal 
religion.  The  Book  of  Psalms  shows,  also,  this 
transformation.  It  is,  no  doubt,  the  national 
hymn-book  and  probably  many,  even  of  the  so- 
called  "I"  Psalms,  should  be  understood  as  the 
collective  expressions  of  national  life.  At  the 
same  time  other  psalms  have  an  unmistakably 
personal  sound.  And  by  its  intense  feeling  and 
by  its  inevitable  applicability  to  personal  religion 
the  lyric  rather  than  the  social  consciousness  came 
to  predominate  in  the  use  of  the  whole  psalter. 

Jewish  legalism,  too,  was  increasingly  personal. 
No  doubt  the  old  patriotic  motive  continued  in 
Pharisaism — the  hope  that  all  Israel,  by  keeping 
the  law  for  one  day  even,  might  secure  its  cor- 
porate redemption.  But  since  the  law  extended 
so  intimately  into  personal  acts  and  even  motives, 


NATIONALISM  TRANSCENDED  259 

it  naturally  created  a  greater  personal  self-con- 
sciousness. The  Jew  was  interested  in  his  own 
conformity  and  even  in  his  own  reward. 

So  even  eschatology  became  personal.  Per- 
sonal immortality  or  resurrection,  a  doctrine 
barely  suggested  in  the  Old  Testament,  was  no 
doubt  greatly  fostered  by  Persian,  Egyptian,  and 
other  foreign  influences;  but  it,  too,  was  a  natural 
outcome  of  forces  native  to  Judaism.  When  the 
national  hope  still  burned  brightly,  personal  re- 
ward was  simply  a  share  in  the  national  glory. 
But  what  of  those  who  had  fallen  asleep  ?  Must 
their  surviving  comrades  sorrow  for  them  even 
as  the  rest  who  have  no  hope?  Naturally,  the 
only  consolation  that  God  could  give  to  the  mar- 
tyrs was  a  share  after  death  in  the  national 
restoration.  This  is  the  view-point  of  the  Book 
of  Daniel.  But  as  the  hope  of  national  restora- 
tion grew  dim  or  vague  or  superterrestrial,  the 
ultimate  fate  of  the  individual  came  into  the 
foreground  of  interest.  This  question  is  also 
characteristic  of  the  religious  movements  of  the 
later  Jewish  era;  and,  as  Professor  Charles  has 
shown,  the  eschatology  of  the  individual  merged 
with  and  finally  overshadowed  the  eschatology  of 
the  nation.  "The  eternal  worth  ascribed  to  the 
nation  was  thus  also  attributed  to  the  individual, 
and  the  two  were  united  in  a  final  synthesis."  1 
For  the  national  questions  of  the  new  day, 
1Knudson,  Religious  Teaching  of  the  Old  Testament,  p.  349. 


260  NATIONAL  IDEALS 

however,  the  Old  Testament  still  has  a  message 
of  permanent  value.  But  that  message  is  not  its 
cruder  nationalism,  which  in  popular  opinion 
makes  it  either  a  contrast  or  a  supplement  to  the 
New  Testament.  What  it  shares  with  the  New 
Testament  is  its  chief  glory.  "It  is  the  pro- 
phetic denial  of  national  claims  and  hopes,  not 
the  older  and  always  prevalent  assertion  of  them, 
that  constitutes  the  reality  and  truth  of  the  Old 
Testament  hope.  It  is  hope  for  Jehovah  and  his 
righteousness,  not  for  Israel  and  its  glory."  l  And 
this  transcendent  hope  is  not  to  be  fulfilled  either 
by  the  dreams  of  national  Weltmacht  or  by  visions 
of  a  divine  cataclysm.  It  is  to  be  realized  by  a 
transformation  of  national  character  and  ideals. 
"  The  prophet's  criticism  of  the  national  hope  and 
reinterpretation  of  it  as  the  hope  for  righteousness 
really  struck  at  the  heart  of  the  materialism  and 
selfishness  of  the  popular  national  hope,  its  false 
pride  and  its  denial  of  trust  and  of  good-will 
toward  mankind."  2  And  the  same  criticism  and 
reinterpretation  of  national  ideals  is  needed  again 
to-day.  Perhaps  a  real  superstate  would  help 
create  much  of  the  new  spirit  required — patriot- 
ism giving  place  to  compatriotism,  nationalism 
to  supernationalism.  Certainly  no  mere  formula 
or  compact  can  suffice  alone.  "  Organization  and 
new  machinery  are  needed.  But  to  avail  much, 
reconstruction  must  proceed  from  within:  New 
1  Porter,  op.  tit.,  p.  41,  *IW.,  p.  43. 


NATIONALISM  TRANSCENDED  261 

ideals  stretching  beyond  frontiers;  the  realizing 
of  new  duties;  a  wider  outlook;  less  idolatry  of 
the  State;  more  regard  to  society  as  something 
larger  than  the  State;  an  effort  to  rise  nearer  to 
the  height  of  the  ancient  conception  of  States  as 
so  many  mansions  of  one  city."  1 

To  such  supernationalism  the  many  spiritual 
hopes  of  the  prophets  lead  us.  But  if  we  cultivate 
the  narrower  nationalism,  like  that  of  Judaism, 
with  its  arrogance  and  cruelty,  we  shall  be  mak- 
ing ourselves  unfit  for  the  world  society  which 
shall  be  the  Kingdom  of  God. 

2  Macdonell,  in  Contemporary  Review,  March,  1918. 


CONCLUSION 

THE  story  of  Israel's  experience,  from  whatever 
special  angle  it  be  considered,  is  a  tale  of  romance 
that  has  perennial  interest.  But  when  it  is  exam- 
ined as  the  development  of  great  ideals,  it  is  a 
story  of  distinctly  modern  meaning.  Not  only 
does  it  afford  many  parallels  to  situations  in  our 
own  national  and  international  life:  it  supplies  as 
well  a  kind  of  perspective  and  direction  for  our 
own  study  of  modern  problems.  Over  against 
the  pessimism  that  finds  in  history  a  mechanical 
and  unyielding  process,  an  alternation  between 
incurable  stagnation  and  irresistible  revolution, 
the  career  of  the  Hebrews  shows  the  pliability  of 
the  stuff  that  moulds  a  people's  life.  It  shows 
the  developmental  character  of  national  ideals, 
and  the  creative  power  of  mere  ideals  in  shaping 
a  nation's  destiny. 

In  peculiar  degree  the  experience  of  Israel  is  a 
stimulus  to  the  individual.  In  the  courageous 
leaders  of  its  successive  crises  it  makes  manifest 
the  place  of  personal  initiative  in  the  guidance  of 
public  opinion  and  action.  And  this  influence  is 
quite  as  manifest  in  the  examples  of  minority 
patriots,  the  misunderstood  and  misused  idealists, 
as  in  the  more  prosperous  and  popular  heroes  of 
military  success  and  political  orthodoxy.  The 
story  of  Israel  is,  as  an  early  Christian  writer  ob- 

262 


CONCLUSION  263 

served,  the  story  of  men  of  faith,  a  series  of  indi- 
viduals whose  power  was  commensurate  to  the 
obstacles  which  they  overcame. 

Finally  the  experience  of  Israel  indicates  by  its 
direction,  if  not  by  its  achievement,  something  of 
the  goal  that  still  awaits  the  approach  of  a  slowly 
perfecting  national  idealism.  There  was  much  in 
the  nationalism  of  Israel  that  illustrates,  as  it 
has  been  used  to  justify,  the  baser  limitations  of 
modern  provincial  chauvinism,  national  jealousy, 
and  political  immorality.  But  as  the  religion  of 
the  Old  Testament  prepared  the  way  for  that  of 
the  New,  so  at  least  in  its  higher  reaches  its 
political  idealism  contains  the  germs  of  the  more 
Christian  statecraft  and  world  order  toward 
which  Christendom  is  so  tragically  groping. 
Surely,  in  days  of  the  world's  direst  need,  this 
message  of  guidance  and  hope  which  the  Bible 
contains  should  not  be  hidden  under  the  covering 
of  scholarship  or  obscured  by  theology,  but  should 
be  proclaimed  in  the  market-place  and  the  forum 
for  all  men  to  hear. 


INDEX 


Abel,  38 
Abimelech,  30  /. 
Adams,  E.  D.,  quoted,  244 
Agriculture,  of  Genesis,  9 

of  Canaan,  26 

its  appeal  to  nomads,  32  /. 
Ahaz,  121  f.,  128 
Amaziah,  108 /. 
Amos,  from  the  country,  40 

his  message,  101-110 

comparison    with    Hosea, 

116 /. 
Antiochus  Epiphanes,  226  /., 

230,  236 

Apocalypse,  literature  of  sup- 
pression, 228 

definition  of,  231  ff. 

and  Messianic  Hope,  244 

supernaturalism  of,  256 /. 
Arabia,  origin  of  Hebrews,  8 

nomad  tribes  of,  13  /. 
Assyria,    in    Isaiah's    time. 
120 /. 

revolt  against,  128  /. 

at    siege    of    Sennacherib, 
157-161 

Baal,  Phoenician.  155 
Baals,  prophets'   condemna- 
tion of,  41  /. 
of  Canaan,  27  /. 
fusion  with  Jehovah,  36 
conflict  with  Jehovah,  31, 

37,  155 /. 
Babylon,  besieges  Jerusalem, 

162  jf. 

hatred  for,  175 /. 
Baruch,  165 /. 
Blood  revenge,  11 


Cain,  38,  58 
Canaan,  56 

invasion  of,  14,  70,  143 
superior  civilization  of,  25- 

34 
religious    innovations    of, 

42 /. 
Charles,  R.  H.,  quoted,  230, 

244 

Clan,  see  Tribe 
Conscription,  77 /. 

Damascus,  anti-Assyrian  co- 
alition, 121 
fall  of,  128 
Daniel,    Book    of,    message, 

233-238 

supernaturalism  of,  256 
view  on  immortality,  259 
David,  36,  39,  40,  63 
his  kingship,  75  /. 
as  type  of  Messiah,  76,  242, 

252 

Davidson,  A.  B.,  quoted,  167 
Day  of  Jehovah,  105  /. 
Deborah,  Song  of,  29,  46,  62, 

69 
Democracy,    of    the    desert, 

13,  40,  153 /. 
in  Canaan,  27 
of  the  prophets,  40,  154 
of  Deuteronomy,  145  /. 
Deuteronomy,  42,  70,  76,  85, 
180 


purpose,  49 
histoi 


>ry  and  message,  137- 
149 

national  self-consciousness, 
213 


265 


266 


INDEX 


Diplomacy,    substitute    for 

war,  67 /. 

futility  of,  126,  130 
of  Rabshakeh,  158,' 

Ecclesiasticus,  5 
Egypt,  exodus  from,  8, 17,  22 
superficial    contact    with. 

24 /. 

alliance  with,  128  /. 
Isaiah's  distrust  of,  130  /., 

158 

Elijah,  from  the  country,  40 
revolutionary,  9 If. 
prophet  of  warning,  153- 

157 
Elisha,  revolutionary,  41 

stories  of,  150 

Emmet,  C.  W.,  quoted,  230 
Eschatology,  see  Apocalypse 
Esther,  50,  229  /.,  231 
Exclusiveness,  50,  212  ff. 
Exile,   The,   encourages  na- 
tional unity,  49 
Jerusalem's  condition  dur- 
ing, 173,  207  jf. 
causes  feeling  of  revenge, 

174 /. 
causes    feeling    of    guilt, 

180 /. 
reconstruction  literature  of. 

184-187 

leadership  of  prophets  dur- 
ing, 187 /. 
religion  of,  211 
Exodus,  The,  origin  of  Israel, 

8,  17 

story  of,  17-23 

parallels  to,  105 

Ezekiel,  48,  85,  193 

personal  religion  of,  179 
vindicated,  187 /. 
date  of,  190 
priestly  plans  of,  193 

Faith,  denied  in  war,  72  /., 

130  ff. 

theme  of  Isaiah's  teaching, 
124-127 


basis  of  Messianic  Hope, 
245 /. 

Genealogies,  of  Genesis,  55  /. 
Genesis,  agriculture  of,  9 

national  spirit  of,  52 

stories  of,  53-60 
Geography,  determines  politi- 
cal unit,  27,  36 

element     in     nationalism, 
34,  210 /. 

basis  of  genealogies,  55  /. 
Gilbert,  G.  H.,  quoted,  71 
Gordon,  A.  R.,  quoted,  113 
Gunkel,  H.,  quoted,  57,  58 

Hellenism,  216 

gradual  influence  of,  225  /. 
forced       denationalization 

by,  226  ff.,  234,  237 
Hezekiah,  158-161 
History,    written    to    teach 
ideals,  6  /.,  51  ff.,  150  jf., 
180 

controlled     by     Jehovah, 

123 /.,  130 /.,  189,248 

moulded    by    ideals,    239, 

262 
revelation  of  God's  love, 

113 /.,  144 

Hosea,  41,  48  and  note 
anti-war,  72 
message  of  loyalty,    111- 

118 

Hospitality,  of  the  desert,  11 
of  the  law,  15 

Immortality,  259 
Individualism,     growth     of, 
257  /.     See  also  Religion, 
personal 
Internationalism  of  Jehovah, 

98/.,  104:  ff.,  125  f. 
Isaiah,  anti-war,  65 
message,  of  faith,  119-127 
of   statesmanship,    128- 

136 

at  siege  of  Jerusalem,  157- 
161 


INDEX 


267 


Isaiah,  II,  hopeful  outlook  of, 

189 /. 
internationalism   of,    196- 

205 
reconstruction    ideals    of, 

194  /. 

Israel,  origin  of  name,  31,  56 
destruction  of,  126 
identified  witn  Servant  of 
Jehovah,  202 /. 

Jehovah,  origin  of  name,  31 
Jeremiah,  48,  137 /.,  186 

condemns  sacrifice,  43 

anti-war,  65 

message,  162-172 

vindicated,  187  jf. 
Jerusalem,  anti-Assyrian  ne- 
gotiations at,  121  /. 

captured  by  Sennacherib, 
129 

centralization  of  eultus  at, 
147 

escape  from  Sennacherib, 
157-161 

siege  by  Babylon,  163 

fall  of,  173 /.,  207 

during  exile,  184  /. 
Job,  Book  of,  182 
Jonah,  Book  of,  50,  215 

message,  217-223 
Josephus,  quoted,  82 
Josiah,  49,  138 
Judges,  Book  of,  30,  45/.,  47 
Judith,  Book  of,  229 /.,  231 

Kautzsch,  E.,  quoted,  81 
Kings,  Books  of,  48 

prophetic    authorship    of. 

150-161 
Kingship,  criticism  of,  40,  41, 

77  jf. 

its  adoption,  74  /. 
of  David,  75 /. 
and  theocracy,  80-87 
in  Deuteronomy,  139,  146 
Jezebel's  idea  of,  154 
Knudson,  A.  C.,  quoted,  181, 
209,  257,  259 


Lamentations,      Book      of, 

173  tf. 
Law,  function  of  government, 

85 

during  exile,  211  /. 
becomes  personal,  258 /. 
Leadership,  262 
of  Moses,  20 
of   the   prophets,    146  /., 

150ff.,lS7ff. 
Liberty,  achieved  in  Exodus, 

21  ff. 

Loyalty,  of  the  tribe,  15 
Hosea's  conceotion  of,  111- 
118 

Maccabees,  86,  226-231 
Macdonell,  J.,  quoted,  260 
Margolis,  M.  L.,  quoted,  73 
Marriage,  as  religious  meta- 
phor, 115 
Messianic  Hope,  86  /.,  182, 

239-250 
identification  of  Messiah, 

202  .ff. 

Micah,  anti-war,  72 
Militarism,    127.    See    also 

War 

Monarchy,  see  Kingship 
Moore,  G.  F.,  quoted,  30,  80 
Morality,  124 /.,  254 
Moses,  patriot,  5 
leadership,  20 
influences  on,  24 
national  unity  under,  45 

Nationalism,  of  the  New  Tes- 
tament, 3/. 

of  the  prophets,  3 

of  Paul,  4 

in  war,  61  ff. 

of  Isaiah,  125 /. 

deepened  by  exile,  209  ff. 

narrow,  of  Jonah,  217-223 

breakdown  of,  225  ff. 

transcended,  251-261 
Nehemiah,  50,  214 
Nomad   life,    origin   of   He- 
brews, 9,  24,  35 


268 


INDEX 


the  clan,  10 
vendetta,  11 

influence  on  Hebrews,  12 
hostility  of,  14 /. 
loyalty  of,  15 

contrast  with  Canaan,  25  jf. 
gives  place  to  higher  civi- 
lization, 32 
distrust  of  innovation,  58 

Passover,  as  national  holiday, 

21 

Patriarchs,  national  types,  58 
Patriotism,  taught  by  stories, 

51  ff. 

of  Genesis,  59 
of  war,  62  /. 
of  the  prophets,  98 
assumption  of  special  priv- 
ilege denied,  104 
of  Deuteronomy,  140  /. 
of  Jeremiah,  168 
of  II  Isaiah,  198 
narrow,  of  Jonah,  217-223 
Patronymic,  56 
Paul,  internationalism  of,  4, 

50 

Peace,  192 /. 

Peake,  A.  S.,  quoted,  171 
Peters,  J.  P.,  quoted,  153 
Pharisees,  origin  of,  178 
Politics,  ideals  of,  in  Canaan, 

27 
prophet's  relation  to,  119- 

127 
intention  of  Deuteronomy, 

139 /. 
religion  becomes  substitute 

for,  177 /. 
Porter,  F.  C.,  quoted,  256, 

260 

Preaching,  101 
Priesthood,  in  war,  65 
conflict  with  kingship,  84- 

87 
comparison  with  prophets, 

94 /. 
planned  by  Ezekiel,  193 


Prophets,  as  reformers,  2  /.. 

8^100 

patriotism  of,  5 
leaders  of  revolution,  40  /., 

44 

criticize  kingship,  41 
attack  Canaanite  customs. 

42 /. 

in  war,  64/.,  69  #. 
relation  to  politics,    119- 

129 
influence  on  Deuteronomy, 

145 /.,  146 /. 
writing  of  history  by,  150- 

161 
popularity  of,  during  Exile, 

179 /. 
leaders  of  reconstruction, 

187  ff. 
emphasis      on      morality, 

97#,  254 /. 

internationalism  of,  3,  255 
Psalms,  as  national  liturgy,  3 
Messianic,  86 
personal  religion  of,  258 

Rabshakeh,  158  jf. 
Rauschenbusch,  W.,  quoted, 

97 

Rechabites,  38,  39  /. 
Reconstruction,  184^195 
Religion,  of  Canaan,  27 /. 

in  war,  63  ff. 

as  a  theocracy,  80-87 

in  conflict  with  prophets, 
92 

social  aspects  of,  96 

opposed  to  Amos,  108,  110 

nationalized,  5,  147 /. 

substitute      for      politics, 
177 /. 

during  Exile,  211  /. 

personal,    169  fi.t   178  /., 
258 /. 

in  II  Isaiah,  199 /. 
Remnant,  134 /. 
Repatriation,  191 /. 
Revelation,  256 

broadside  against  Rome,  4 


INDEX 


269 


Robinson,  H.  W.,  quoted,  245      Todd,  J.  C.,  quoted,  47,  49, 
Rogers,  R.  W.,  quoted,  129  140 

Ruth,  50,  215  Tribe,  as  unit,  10 

loyalty  of,  15 
geographical  divisions  of,  56 


Sacrifice,  condemned,  43,  95 
vicarious,  16,  201-205 
human,  43 

Samaria,  fall  of,  48,  128 
Samuel,  40,  62,  77,  79,  93 
Saul,  75,  79 

Secession,  not  condemned,  48 
Sennacherib,     treatment    of 

Judah,  129 
besieges    Jerusalem,    157- 


Servant  of  Jehovah,  196-205 
Smith,  G.  A.,  quoted,  12,  13, 
16,  46,  115,  213 


Smith,  W.  R.,  quoted,  91,  97,      War,  61-73 


patronymic,  56 

Unity,  encouraged  at  Exodus, 
19,45 

absent  in  politics,  35,  45-50 

in  religion,  49,  141 
Uriah,  165 

Vendetta,  11 

Wade,  G.  W->  quoted,  20 
Wallis,  Louis,  quoted,  28,  36, 
37 


135,  136 
Social  injustice,  relation  to 

national  questions,  106/., 

132 /. 

Solomon,  75,  77 
Sons  of  the  prophets,  89  ff. 
Stanley,  A.  P.,  quoted,  81 

Theocracy,  80-87 


denies  God,  130  ff. 
Wars  of  Jehovah,  Book  of  the, 

29,62 
Welch,    Adam    C.,    quoted, 

141,  143 
Wilson,    Woodrow,    quoted, 

Zedekiah,  166 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 
BERKELEY 

Return  to  desk  from  which  borrowed. 
This  book  is  DUE  on  the  last  date  stamped  below. 


iNTER-UBR 

NOV 


REC'D 

MAY  5 

,       8Nov'60RT 
REC'D 

OCT27 


REC'D  UD 

3'64-spM 


LD  21-100m-9,'47(A5702sl6)476 


.168 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 


